Theres a question of what point does amending a testimony become straightup lying or perjuring one self . One said that the testimony of other witnesses helped to refresh their memories and see in new light their own experiences and will be instructive to see what volcker has to say for himself on the two key questions, quid pro quo, bribery plot, and what he was doing with Rudy Giuliani. His testimony was that he Rudy Giuliani as being a nuance and more helpful to bring Rudy Giuliani in and help him understand that he was promulgating the debunked conspiracy scenarios instead of freelance out there in ukraine. Jeff bennett on capitol hill for us, thank you very much. Joining us is democrat congressman jim himes from connecticut. Congressman, your questioning of
control knell vind man was one of the more emotional moments this morning. I wonder if you could look back to that for us this morning. Yeah. Well, it was a pretty tough moment for me. We had gotten word and sort of saw on social media the plan to discredit contrlonel vindman. Combat veteran, purple heart. You saw the tweet out of the white house today. The strategy is same strategy as with bob mueller. Another war hero. To damage his credibility. And, you know, i could see the discomfort of the republican colleagues of what they were tasked to do and didnt do it with relish. The facts are getting worse and worse for the president as each days testimony goes by. But you know, people just need to step back and say what is involved in one Party Feeling they need to trash the reputation of ambassador ivan i
ivanovich . Of Colonel Vindman . What is involved . Why do you need to trash the reputations of people who have so well served this country . Congressman himes, its so stark watching the way your committee fractured not just in terms of the approach with the witness but the Subject Matter each side is addressing with the witnesses. What does it say to you that from devin nunez, asking about the dnc server, lines of questioning of the whistleblowers identity, how is it in the room . It is uncomfortable. It is particularly uncomfortable because i know that theyre good
people and we are supposed to consider both sides but there is not a both sides. Right . There is a president who went off of the Talking Points he was prepared and instead of asking the ukraine to get more serious about investigating and stopping corruption, he has to they target their corruption at joe biden. Theres not a lot of disputd about that. I understand my republicans try to frame it as he has the right to fire an ambassador. He doesnt have the right to do either of those things for a corrupt purpose. And so whats happening here, katie, my republican colleagues defend the indefensible and hard to do. It requires you to twist yourself into a pretzel, requires you to put your ethics on ice. Why they do it . Look. I get it as somebody whos an elected official. They fear this president and if they break theyre the subject of an attack on twitter and how these professionals have been targeted by the president. So i get it but god i would love
to believe that people look and say i dont know if its impeachable but its ugly and not consistent with the values and the ethics of the oval office but we cant get that. Congressman, ill turn it over to ari in a second but look ahead to the amp. Four witnesses is a lot. Were digesting the emotional moments from the morning and help us make the turn to the afternoon session, what facts are hoping to get into the record in this public setting from Ambassador Volcker and tim morrison . Well, you know, it is interesting because i think going into this day there was a sense on the part of my republican colleagues that volcker and morrison were likely to be more friendly witnesses to their defense of the day and of course they trotted out this single line from morrisons testimony where he was, you know, saying he had some issue with Colonel Vindmans judgment
and trying to damage the credibility and i think that theyre expecting a more friendly set of witnesses but when you think about it, you know, one of the lines we know they try to draw out is that one of the witnesses didnt think the behavior was illegal. Okay. First of all, thats a pretty low bar. Secondly, that is not the judgment of the fact witness is called upon to make. Ultimately, the congress of the United States will gather the evidence and make the decision about whether theres an Impeachable Offense but this is the kind of thing they hang on to in what is a long series of witnesses all of whom saying i was there or heard from people there and this is a bad thing. Thats a pretty when you think about it, a pretty thin defense. Congressman, ari melber here. Thank you for joining us. Looking forward to kurt volcker who you just mentioned. Im curious how you an the committee will question him on the core of the story which is that he was in the car and
didnt know where it was going because hes quite experienced and so theres quite a bit of parsing in what we understand he said to your committee privately. How will you approach that in the questioning and will it matter in your view of what he has to offer as a fact witness . First of all, you may know more than i do but the word on the street is one may seek to amend their previous testimony, something, of course, we have seen before. Congressman, were certain you know more than we do about what the Intelligence Committee is about to do. Well, no. I can answer that question for you, but again, we need to stand by hearing there may be an amendment of testimony. That could shake everything up but to answer your question, Ambassador Volcker and ambassador sondland both claim that, yeah, they were sort of aware that these investigations were out there. And in one case giuliani, we didnt know what they were
doing, gosh, you know well, you know, well conduct ourselves with more fairness than the republicans. I dont think anybody will call anybody a liar but will try to draw out how two peoples jobs were to understand what was happening in ukraine, to Pay Attention to the language of the president , are they in fact claiming they werent conscious of what was going on . Well see how it develops. Sir, this is nicole again. In television we call that a tv. Are you able to tell us whether theres amended testimony and whether its substantive . I only know that because its what your network was reporting about five minutes ago. Well see. I dont know that to be true but again it wouldnt entirely shock me because, of course, have seen this once before with ambassador sondland and if thats true that
could radically change the nature of this hearing. Do you sense that we can pick up on the emotion when theres someone like Marie Ivano Ivanovich and you can hear a pin drop when she testifies and same is true for a lot of the periods of Colonel Vindmans testimony. Do you sense that they feel more pressure to sort of play and dance with the very political lines of questioning from the republicans on the committee . All of the people interviewed worked in the white house or on the National Security council and most of them lifelong nonpartial professionals. The one individual thats not true for is ambassador sondland
and an interesting story because the whole fact pattern of his behavior from start to finish doesnt exude the behavior of a professional diplomat. And, you know, i dont want to prejudge what his testimony may be later on in this week but, of course, he is the one individual who felt it was necessary after he what was the phrase . Refreshed the recollection to amend his testimony. I agree with you. I hope we get a chance to talk to you again before after ambassador sondlands testimony. It is his amended testimony that the memory was refreshed by the transcripts being released from Ambassadors Taylor and i believe tim morrison, as well. We see some action getting under way behind you. Well let you go. Thank you for spending sometime with us. Please come back afterward if youre able to. It is clear this is an event unfolding in realtime. I have likened it to a puppy cam
and a central way the story is far more unpredictable for the Trump White House than the mueller investigation. This is so fast moving. This is so unpredictable in terms of how the public will receive witnesses like Colonel Vindman, spontaneous applause for the patriotism and courage they display. You cant game up with a president ial tweet. If you look at the mueller investigation, it occurred there was an incredible discipline on that team. It went on for months and months and months and months and there were no leaks, no one really knew what was going on so everyone was free to color outside the lines with whatever they wanted to put on it. And then when he testified there was a sense of the air going out of the room in that he was so
intent on just presenting the facts that it was seen as a Big Quote Unquote Victory even though how many times ive heard you said, confirm russian contacts. 150. 150 so, you know, even though they delineated serious obstruction issues in that report this is different. Now the question is how Many Americans who are not already firmly convinced one way or the other are going to be watching this testimony and getting a sense of this evidence . Or will they get it in their respective Echo Chambers . Will they get it where theyre playing the clip of that brave patriot saying you know, because in america, you know, we do it right . That i am an american. I serve america. All the patriotic things that reassured you that this guy was
there just to tell what he saw. How Many Americans will actually see that or how many of them will see what the president is retweeting or what the white house is putting out trying to question his judgment . It is a battle for correct information. And time will tell whether enough americans are taking their jobs as jurors seriously and watching this testimony so they can make up their own mind whos telling the truth and why. Ari, one of the only measures we have of that is Public Opinion polling showing that i think the latest the Washington Post abc news poll shows 70 of americans rendered a judgment on the conduct in question and believe that asking ukraine for dirt on joe biden is wrong. I think that same poll shows up is t support of removal of office. You have been talking about the evidence that it is seeping through. They understand what the
president did. Yeah. He sought to get help in his domestic campaign. From ukraine. Thats why the facts are scary for the white house as supportived by evidence and this testimony under oath. At the end of the day only three president s have seen an Impeachment Probe get to this point. What you see here, the cameras sometimes is shaky keeping an eye on the hearing an the colleagues keeping an eye on when the witnesses walk in for the next round of hearings. This process right here, only three president s faced. Only one of them had this result in them ousted, richard nixon. What was the underlying issue . Whether he was trying to steal the election. Americans do get that. We have a thing about democracy. We know its messy. We know we have an Electoral College and a senate thats not a direct democracy. I do Think Americans in our steeped in culture and civic life understand where democracy fits in and out of the three probes, very different, it was the one of stealing an election
that nixon Didnt Quote Unquote Need to do. He won with a big margin and americans started to think, well, how much of that margin is stolen and how many times did he do this without getting caught . If i can broaden out getting ready for the next hearing, nicole, for those of us living in and out of this in these very odd times, 2019 is donald trump gets through the Mueller Probe with his presidency intact. High rate of indictments of the aides and advisers than any other president ever in the first term, a lot of blood on the field and gets through and turns around the next day and says 2016 i was offered help. My folks got way too close to the meetings. 2020, im demanding the help. Im extorting the help. On this narrow point im reporting what hes publicly admitted. Right. Help me. Im open to it. He was privately lobbying for it. Privately trying to according to the witnesses extort it. And then publicly said yes on the white house lawn. Dont forget. This is what we would see in a senate trial if there is evidence. He said something more damning than any other written report. He wanted a Serious Investigation of the bidens. Point. Point. So americans are watching this hearing with that understanding. The bribery was about the election, not another thing. If the judgment is going to be rendered it is going to be about whether we can accept that as a country. It would seem that where this is heading if you just watch the lines of questioning by republicans theyre moving away from disputing the evidence. The Smear Campaigns against the witnesses are not sort of a bug, not a side effect. Theyre the central defense of donald trump. Right. I think to aris point we have seen teflon don and might be Seeing Tin Trump now but the truth is that i think the republicans for a long time have
been demonstrating theres no evidence and doing personal attack or other forms of distraction like what really did happen with the bidens . And when you bring it back to this point, both that i think ari importantly raises of trumps admission that you also back to clairs question of what happened in that month between april and may, one of the things that happened that the republicans are ignoring is that Rudy Giuliani, was it may 9 or 10, publicly said idm going to ukraine to turn the tables on the democrats because this will be very, very helpful to trump and im going to get what get them to look at 2016 election and the bidens. He said that on may 9th. It was reported in the New York Times on the 9th and then the outcry that resulted in that trip the plug was only pulled because of the outcry that made its way ultimately to the white
house and i think on may 11th that trip was canceled. Thats why to mayas point the time line and the facts dont help the defenders of the president much. You mentioned teflon don and tempting Me To Quote Rick Ross but ill hold back and were moments away. They as you know just reminding the viewers, watching the room, they delayed for some votes and scheduled to come back in two minutes ago. Nicole, i think the question here is, you know, we were getting a readout of a colleague at the white house about donald trump doing the normal thing he does, the tv style points. Yeah. References to the outfits and the mood and whether nunez lost points on style but not that he was wrong going at this currently enlisted soldier in bay but style points. I wonder if as we look at the next amp hearing what the style of the men is going to be and perceived by republicans to hope they would be somewhat defenders when from what i can tell and we
discussed this with a member of the committee, nicole, it seems that mr. Volcker whos so central is mostly trying to distance himself from where the plot is headed and not a great sign. Well, your point to the congressman is absolutely right. He will describe himself as, sure, i was in the car, on the ground, his defense amounts to trying to do the best with the hand id been dealt. I was for ukraine getting the milita military aid. Theres no reason to doubt that but he accepted the Playing Field as it exists and that was clearly the conditionality of military aid on trumps request for the investigations he sought which were into the 2016 election, a theory debunked by Donald Trumps own Homeland Security adviser tom bossert and the investigations designed to damage the bidens. The bidens being who in historical in the locked amber
of the bidens were the family, the potential dynasty, senator that donald trump was worried about most facing in the election and eagleeyed viewers will see in the corner of the screen, a debate that msnbcs involved with and tomorrow night a debate among candidates seeking to both be the nominee against donald trump and potentially weeks even before the iowa caucus be jurors in the potential senate trial. Yeah. We have to remember how donald trump ran his first campaign. And the only frame of reference he has is marketing. Right. He is a marketer. Hes a guy who understands brand and he understands marketing and what he did is he marketed to a segment of the American Public who wanted change, thought they might have gotten it with barack obama. Didnt feel like they got it. You know . They still couldnt afford to retire. Still couldnt afford to send
their kids to college and decided to pull the pin on the grenade and lob it into washington through donald trump because donald trump marketed to them that he was their guy. Now, this is a Guy Who Guilded Toilets and jumbo jets and has never been anything but an elite. But he got how to talk to them. So now he sees the next election through that same frame of reference. Doesnt matter whats true, whether its fair. It Doesnt Matter whether or not its what president s do. He knew he needed something on the bidens. Because what biden had and he got this, that none of the other opponents had, was everybody trusted him. He had character. He was somebody who most americans whether you like him or dont like him, liked joe biden and knew he was a good guy and fundamentally understood i have to make joe biden into a bad guy and rudy and he decided this is the way to do it. By the way, he gave a little
assist to putin along the way and nobody he loves more than putin. Are you surprised that there hasnt been more of a focus on theres no coincidence once again we are mired in another scandal that has a beneficiary Vladimir Putin . You know, putin is all through this. Right. Yes, giuliani announced he was going to the ukraine and that he was going after the 2016 elections and but putin already signaled this, that the ukraine had been trying to help Hillary Clinton because putin, of course, his focus is bringing down this rebellion in the ukraine. They removed his guy, the United States helped remove his guy. And so, putin is definitely in this mix and, you know, nancy pelosi was not wrong saying all roads lead to putin. That famous photo in the Roosevelt Room Wagging her finger at the president. He tweeted it out thinking it was a good look for him. I think its as big of a test of where you stand on the questions as anything. Are you, joyce, looking for a different focus this afternoon in the lines of questioning with these two witnesses . So this is the defendants orb i should say the democrats playing defense a little bit. We dont know exactly what theyll see this afternoon. So far these have been their witness that is they have been putting on and asking direct questions to. Tell us your story. Now well see if the republicans finally have some witnesses who can help them attack the core conduct thats portrayed so far because right now the democrats own the narrative. The republicans dont have the counter factual narrative. This is really their only opportunity an well find out if that will come to pass. We should mention we are looking here at multiple shots of the Intelligence Committee room and will be hearing the third and fourth witnesses of the day. The senator, nicole, the president ial race, we saw eric
swalwell. Nunez you see there with the house gop counsel. Moments ago we saw the democratic counsel. I dont believe weve seen Chairman Schiff yet on camera. We are as we keep the clock around here about eight minutes overdue from when this second hearing was that means theyre about on time. We see Chairman Schiff. Ten minutes late is always on time. Approaching the table. We are now as you say eight minutes overdue from the hearing and 29 hours from the debate as we prepare, nicole, for this next round of questioning. Keep in mind that kurt volcker was the very first witness who testified Behind Closed Doors in the Impeachment Inquiry and the nature of that testimony and the documents. I think he was one of the first and most generous sharers of documents, he shared the Text Messages that are now infamous where ambassador taylor said if
were commissioning military aid on political investigations thats crazy. Crazy. Came from kurt volcker. A realtime objection to this plot at the heart of this Impeachment Probe and second round of hearing this afternoon. Lines of questioning that ensnared Gordon Sondland and his testimony. Tim morrison, an earliest witness to the quid pro quo for military aid and the meeting, something half a dozen and counting witnesses to. Yeah. So you have to imagine that Chairman Schiff laid a predicate here in the opening and closing statements this morning as we watch mr. Voluntarily kcker. And how much Chairman Schiff uses the Afternoon Hearing to repeat which is a part of any investigation and obviously any story you tell or broaden this out. To sharpen other details. Remember here that these two witnesses are republican
witnesses. These are two of the witnesses the republicans requested be called so i dont think well hear anything about how unfair the process is this afternoon. Volcker resigned almost immediately after the scandal came into public view. Meeting will come to order. Good afternoon. This is the fourth in a series of Public Hearings The Committee will be holding as part of the
house of representatives Impeachment Inquiry. Without objection the chair declares a resez any time. There is a quorum present. Well proceed today in the same fashion as the other hearings. Ill make an Opening Statement and the Ranking Member can make an Opening Statement and then turn to the witnesses for Opening Statements and then to questions. With that, i now recognize myself to give an Opening Statement in the Impeachment Inquiry into donald trump the 45th president of the United States. This afternoon we will hear from two witnesses requested by the minority, ambassador volker, the state Department Special representative for Ukraine Negotiations and tim morrison, the senior, former Senior Director of European Affairs at the National Security council. I appreciate the minoritys request for the two important witnesses as well as Undersecretary Of State Hale from whom well hear tomorrow. As we have heard, when joe biden was considering whether to enter
the race for presidency in 2020, Rudy Giuliani began a campaign to weaken Vice President bidens candidacy by pushing ukraine to investigate him and his son. To clear away any obstacle to the scheme, days after the new ukrainian president was elected, trump ordered the recall of ambassador yovanovitch. Trump also canceled mike pences participation in the inauguration of president Zelensky On May 20th and instead sent a delegation headed by rick perry, ambassador to the eu sondland and ambassador volker. These three returned from kiev and briefed President Trump on the encouraging first interactions with the new ukrainian administration. Hopes that trump would agree to an early meeting with ukrainian president were soon diminished, however, when trump pushed back. According to volker, he just
didnt believe it, he was skeptical and said i hear, you know, hes got some terrible people around him. President trump also told them he believed that ukraine tried to take him down and told the three amigos talk to rudy and they did. One of those interactions a week before the july 25th phone call between trump and zelensky when ambassador volker had breakfast with Rudy Giuliani at the trump hotel. Volker testified that he pushed back on giulianis accusation against joe biden. On july 22nd days before talking to zelensky, ambassador volker had a conference with Rudy Giuliani and so the giuliani introduced. On july 25th, before it took place, ambassador volker sent a message, heard from the white house, assuming president z
convinces trump to investigate get to the bottom of what happened in 2016. We will nail down date for a visit to washington. Good luck. Exclamation point. Later that day donald trump would have the now infamous phone call with zelensky and responded to ukraines appreciation for u. S. Defense support and a request by president zelensky to buy more antitank missiles saying i would like you to do us a favor, though. The favor involved two investigations that giuliani was pushing for into the bidens in 2016. Ambassador volker was not on the call but when asked what it reflected he testified no president of the United States should ask a foreign leader to help interfere in a u. S. Election. Among those listening in on the July 25th Call is tim morrison who had taken over as an nsc Senior Director for european
affairs days before but had been briefed by the predecessor fiona hill about the irregular Second Channel operating in parallel to the official win. Vindman and ms. Williams like Them Morrison emerged from the call troubled. He was concerned enough about what he heard on the July 25th Call that he went to see the nsc Legal Adviser soon after it had ended. Colonel vindmans fear was the president broken the law potentially and morrison said of his concern that the concern was that the call could be damaging if its leaked. Soon after this discussion with lawyers at the nsc, the call record was hidden away on a secure server used to store highly classified intelligence where it remained until late september when the call record was publicly released. Following the July 25th Call, ambassador volker worked with sondland and you krahnians president s close adviser on a statement to satisfy giuliani. When he sent over a draft that still failed to include the words bahraisma and 2016 giuliani said it would lack credibility and ambassador volker added both to the draft statement. Both volker and morrison were by late july aware that the assistance was cut off at the direction of the president. As the ukrainians became aware of the suspension of assistance and the scheduling of a white house meeting of trump and zelensky dragged on, the pressure increased and any pretense of a linkage dropped away. Morrison went to warsaw September 1st and pence and zelensky and pence met anze len ski raised the suspended foreign assistance. They believed what could help move the aid if the Prosecutor General in ukraine goes to the mike and announce that he was
opening the barisma investigation. On september 7th, ambassador sondland had a Telephone Call with trump and asked him what he wanted from ukraine. According to morrison he spoke with sondland after the call, trump insisted that there was no quid pro quo and president zelensky must personally announce the opening of the investigation and he should want to do it and sondland said if president zelensky didnt agree to a Public Statement about the investigations the u. S. And ukraine would be at a stalemate, meaning it would not receive the muchneeded security assistance. Morrison had a sinking feeling after the call. As he realized that the ask was now directed at zelensky himself and not the Prosecutor General as sondland relayed to a senior aide in warsaw September 1st. While President Trump claimed there was no quid pro quo his insistence that zelensky himself must publicly announce the
investigations would be at a stalemate made clear that at least two official acts, white house meeting and 400 million in military aid, were conditioned on receipt of what trump wanted, the invests to help him campaign. The efforts to secure the investigations would continue for several more days but appear to have abruptly ended soon after the three committees of congress announced an investigation into the trump giuliani ukraine scheme. Only then would the aid be released. I recognize Ranking Member nunez for any remarks he would like to make. Welcome back to act two of todays circus, ladies and gentlemen. We are here to continue what the democrats tell us is a serious, somber and even prayerful process of attempting to overthrow a duly elected president. If theyre successful the end result would be to disenfranchise tens of millions of americans who thought the president is chosen by
americans, not 13 democrat partisans on a committee supposed to be overseeing the governments intelligence agencies. And isnt it strange how we morphed into the Impeachment Committee . Presiding over a matter with no Intelligence Component whatsoever. Impeachment is the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee not the Intelligence Committee but putting this farce in the court provides two main advantages for the democrats. It made it easier for them to shroud their depositions in secrecy and avoid giving too big of a role in this spectacle to another chairman in whom they have no confidence. Who can possibly view these proceedings as fair and impartial . Theyre being conducted by democrats who spent three years saturating the air waves with dire warnings that President Trump is a russian agent. And these outlandish attacks
continue to this very day. Just this weekend in front of a crowd of Democratic Party activists the chairman of this committee denounced President Trump as a profound threat to our democracy. And vowed that we will send that shar latin in the white house back to the Golden Throne he came from. How can anyone believe that people who would utter such dramatic absurdities are conducting a fair impeachment process and are only trying to discover the truth . Its obvious the democrats are trying to topple the president solely because they despise him. Because theyve promised since election day to impeach day and apreach hell win reelection next year. No witnesses have identified any crime or Impeachable Offense committed by the president but that Doesnt Matter. Last week the democrats told us
his infraction was asking for a quid pro quo. This week its bribery. Who know what is ridiculous crime theyll be accusing him of next week . As witnesses, the democrats have called a parade of Government Officials who dont like President Trumps ukraine policy. Eastbound though they acknowledge he provided ukraine with lethal military aid, after the Obama Administration refused to do so. They also resent his conduct of policy through channels outside their own authority and control. These actions they argue contradict the socalled interagency consensus. They dont seem to understand that the president alone is constitutionally vested with the authority to set the policy. The American People elect a president , not an interagency consensus. And of course, our previous witnesses had very new, very
little new information to share in these hearings. Thats because these hearings are not designed to uncover new information. Theyre meant to showcase a hand picked group of witnesses who the democrats determine through the secret Audition Process to provide testimony most conductive and conducive to their accusations. In fact, by the time any witness says anything here, people are actually hearing it for the third time. They heard it first through the democrats cherry picked leaks to the Media Sympathizers in the secret depositions and second when the democrats published those Deposition Transcripts in a highly staged manner. Of course, there are no transcripts from crucial witnesses like hunter biden who could testify about his well paying job on the board of a corrupt Ukrainian Company or Alexander Chalupa who worked with the clinton campaign. Thats because the democrats
refused to let us hear from them. As for evidence, we are left with what were left with is the transcript of the trump zelensky phone call when ch the president made public. Americans can read for themselves an unremarblible conversation with president zelensky expressing satsz faction with the call afterwards. The democrats claim president zelensky was bribed and must be lying when he says the call was friendly and posed no problems. Theres some irony here, for weeks we heard the democrats bemoan the damage President Trump supposedly caused to the u. S. Ukrainian Relations but when the ukrainian president contradicts their accusations they publicly dismiss him as a liar. I may be wrong but im fairly sure calling a friendly foreign president newly elected a liar violates their socalled
interagency consensus. So overall, the democrats would have you believe president zelensky was blackmailed with a pause on military aid he didnt know about, that President Trump didnt mention to him and that diplomats testified they always assumed would be lifted. Which it was. Without the ukrainians untaking the actions they were supposedly being coerced into doing. This process is not serious, not sober. Its certainly not prayerful. Its an ambitious attack to deprive the American People of the right to elect a president the democrats dont like. As i mentioned, chairman of the committee claims that democracy is under threat. If thats true, its not the president who poses the danger. I yield back. I thank the gentleman. Were joined this afternoon by Ambassador Kurt Volker and mr. Timothy morrison. Volker served for nearly 30 years, Wokking On European political and Security Issues under five different president ial administrations. During the george w. Bush administration, he served as the Acting Director for European Affairs in the National Security council and latter as a Deputy Assistant Secretary Of State. In 2008, president bush appointed him to the United States permanent representative to nato serving until may 2009. July 2017, he was appointed to be the u. S. Special representative for Ukraine Negotiations serving in that position until he resigned in september. It is a pleasure to welcome mr. Morrison back to where he served for almost two decades as a republican staffer. He was a professional staff member for representative mark kennedy of minnesota and jon kyl
of arizona and late ter long time Policy Director 23r9 republican staff of the House Armed Services committee. July 2018, he joined the National Security council as Senior Director of countering Weapons Of Mass Destruction following the departure of dr. Hill in july 2019 he assumed the position of Senior Direct for o russia and europe. Two final points before the witnesses are sworn. First Witness Depositions were unclassified in nature. And all open hearings will also be held at the unclassified level. Any information they touch on Classified Information will be addressed separately. Second congress will not tolerate reprisal, threat of reprisal for testifying before congress including you or any of your colleagues. If you both please rise and raise your right hand. I will begin by swearing you in. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony youre about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god . Let the record show that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. Thank you. And please be seated. The microphones are sensitive. The written statements will be made part of the record. With that, mr. Morrison you are recognized and immediately thereafter, ambassador volker, you are recognized for your Opening Statement. Chairman schiff, Ranking Member nunez and members of the committee, i appear before you today under subpoena to answer your questions about my time as Senior Director of European Affairs at the white house and National Security council. As related to ukraine and u. S. Security sector assistance to that country. El provide the most complete and Accurate Information i can consistent with my commitment. Whether the conduct the subject of inquiry merits impeachment is
a question for the u. S. House of representatives. I provide factual information based on knowledge and recollection of events. I will not waste time restating details of my deposition that is made public. However, i will highlight the following key points. First, as i previously stated i do not know who the whistleblower is nor do i intend to speculate as 0 who the individual may be. Second, i have Great Respect for my former colleagues from the nsc and the rest of the interagency. Im not here today to question their character or integrity. My recollections and judgments are my own. Some of my colleagues recollections on conversations and interabss may differ from mine but i do not view the differences as an untoward purpose. Third, i continue to believe ukraine is on the front lines of a west and russia. Russia is a failing power. But it is still a dangerous one. The United States aids ukraine and her people so they can fight russia over there and we dont have to fight russia here. Support of crew yans territorial since 2014. It must continue to be. As i stated during my deposition, i feared at the time of the call on july 25th how its disclosure to play in washingtons political climate. My fears have been realized. I understand the gravity of these proceedings but i beg you not to lose sight of the Military Conflict under way today. The illegal Occupation Of Crimea and the importance of reform of ukraines politics and economy. Every day that the focus of discussion of ukraine is on these proceedings is a day when were not focused on ukraine, the United States and western
style liberalism share. I concluded my act of service the day after i last appeared before you. I left the nsc completely of my own volition. I felt no pressure to resign or feared retaliation. I made this Career Choice sometime before i decided to testify on october 31st. Im prepared to answer your questions to the best of my ability and recollection. Thank you. Ambassador volker. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman, Ranking Member. Thank you very much for the opportunity to provide this testimony today. As you know, i was the first person to come forward to testify as part of this inquiry. I did so voluntarily. And likewise, voluntarily provided relevant documentation in my possession to be as cooperative, clear and complete as possible. Im here today voluntarily and i remain committed to cooperating
fully and truthfully with this committee. All i can do is provide the facts as i understood them at the time. I did this On October 3rd in private and i will do so again today. Like many others who have testified in this inquiry, im a career Foreign Policy professional. I began my career as an Intelligence Analyst for Northern Europe for the Central Intelligence agency in 1986. Before joining the State Department in 1988. I served in diplomatic postings primarily focused on european political and Security Issues for over 20 years under president s ronald reagan, george h. W. Bush, bill clinton, george w. Bush and barack obama. My last three positions before leaving the Senior Foreign Service in 2009 were as director for nato and west European Affairs, Principle Deputy assistance Secretary Of State and finally as u. S. Ambassador to nato. In the spring of 2017, then Secretary Of State tillerson asked if i would come back to Government Service for Ukraine Negotiations. I did this on a part time voluntary basis with no salary paid by the u. S. Taxpayer simply because i believed it was important to serve our country in this way. I believed i could steer u. S. Policy in the right direction. For over two years as u. S. Special representative for Ukraine Negotiations my Singular Focus was advancing the Foreign Policy and National Security interests of the United States. In particular, that meant pushing back on russian aggression and supporting the development of a strong, resilient, democratic and prosperous ukraine, one that overcomes a legacy of corruption and becomes integrated into a wider transatlantic community. This is critically important for u. S. National security. If we can stop and reverse russian aggression in ukraine, we can prevent it elsewhere. If ukraine, the cradle of slavic civilization predating moscow, succeeds as a freedom loving and prosperous democracy, it gives us enormous hope that russia may one day change providing a better life for russian people and overcoming its current plague of authoritarianism and threat to the United States. The stakes for the United States and a successful ukraine could not be higher. At no time was aware of or knowingly took part in an effort to urge ukraine to investigate former Vice President biden. As you know from the extensionive realtime Dpok Menation i have provided Vice President biden was not a topic of our discussions. I was not on the july 25th phone call between President Trump and president zelensky. I was not made aware of any reference to Vice President biden or his son by president
trump until the transcript of that call was released on september 25th, 2019. From july 7, 2017, until september 27, 2019, i was the lead u. S. Diplomat dealing with russias war on ukraine. My role was not an irregular channel but the official channel. I reported directly to Secretaries Of State Tillerson and pompeo, kept the National Security adviser and Secretary Of Defense well informed of my efforts and worked closely with the ambassador and as a Senior Director hill and morrison an then assistant secretary mitchell and phil reeker, Deputy Assistant secretary george kent, Deputy Assistant secretary defense laura cooper and nsc director vindman and many, many others. I have known many of them for several years. It was a team effort. When ambassador jovanvitch left i recommended bill taylor to pompeo to have a strong, seasoned professional on the ground. For two years before the events at the heart of this investigation took place, i was the most senior u. S. Diplomat visiting the conflict zone, meeting with victims of russias aggression, urging increased u. S. Security assistance, including lethal weapons, working with ukrainian president Port Schenn Coand then president zelensky and their teams, wokking with france and germany, pressing for support from nato, the eu an pressing for support for nato and support of the ose special monitoring missions. At the time i took the position in summer of 2017 there were mainlior complicated questions swirling in public dooep debaeb
the direction of policy towards ukraine. Would it make some kind of Grand Bargain with russia in which it would trade recognition of russias seizure of ukrainian territory for some other deal in syria or wrels . With the administration recognize russias annexation of cry mira . Will this just become another frozen conflict . There were also a vast number of vacancies in key diplomatic positions so no one was really representing the United States in the Negotiating Process about ending the war in eastern ukraine. During two years of my representative, we turned policy around. U. S. Policy towards ukraine was strong, consistent, and enjoyed support across the administration bipartisan support in congress and support among our allies and ukraine. He changed the language to describe russias adregs. I was administrations most
outspoken public figure highlighting the occupation of parts of ukraine calling out russias responsibility to end the war. I visited war zone three times meeting with soldiers and civilians alike, always bringing media with me to raise the public visibility of russias aggression and humanitarian impact on the lives of the citizens of the known community. We coordinated closely with european allies in canada to maintain a united front against russian aggression and ukraines sovereignty and territorial integrity. Ukraine policy is perhaps the one area where the u. S. And its european allies had been in lock step. This helps to strengthen u. S. Sanctions against russia and maintain u. S. Sanctions as well. Along with others in the administration, i strongly advocated for lifting the ban on the sale of lethal defensive arms to ukraine and advocated for increasing u. S. Security
assistance to the ukraine and urged other countries to follow suit. My team and i drafted the pompeo declaration of july 25th ebb, 2518 in which the secretary clearly and definitively laid out the u. S. Policy of nonrecognition of russias claims annexation of crimea. I engage with our allies with ukraine and with russia in negotiations to implement the agreements holding a firm line on insisting on the withdrawal of russian forces, dismantling the peoples republics and restoring ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity. Together with others in the administration wection kept u. S. Policy steady throughout president ial and parliamentary elections in ukraine and worked hard to strengthen the u. S. Ukraine bilateral relationship under the new president and government hoping shepard in a peaceful transition of power in ukraine n short, whereas two years ago, most observe woerz have said that time is on russias side, by 2019, when i departed, we had turned the tables. And time was now in ukraines side. Its a tragedy for the United States for ukraine that our efforts in this area which were Bearing Fruit have now been thrown into disarray. One of the critical aspects of my role as u. S. Special representative was that as the most senior u. S. Official appointed to work solely on the ukraine portfolio, i needed to step forward to provide leadership. If we need to adopt a policy, i mad the case for it. If we needed to if anyone needed to speak out publicly, i would do it. When befailed to give a timely statement about russias illegal attack on ukraines navy and sue sure of ukraine sailors, i tweet i about it. That was my perspective when i tlaernd we had a significant problem that was impeding our ability to strengthen our support for ukraines new president in his effort to ramp
up ukraines fight against corruption and implementation of needed reforms. I found myself faced with a choice, to be aware of a problem and to ignore it or to accept that it was my responsibility to try to fix it. I tried to fix it. The problem was that despite the unanimous positive assessment and recommendations of those of us who were part of the u. S. President ial delegation that attended the inauguration of president zelenskyy, President Trump was receiving a different negative narrative about ukraine and president zelenskyy. That narrative was fueled by accusations and confirmed by mayor Rudy Giuliani. I became ware of the negative impact this is having. And because of the trez preztial delegation. And we stressed our finding that
president zelenskyy represents the best chance for the mire of corruption have been in. The president and he was skeptical. Given ukraines history of corruption, that is understandable. He said that ukraine was a corrupt country, full of terrible people. He said they tried to take me down. In the course of that conversation, he referenced conversations with mayor giuliani. It was clear to me that despite the positive news and recommendations being conveyed by this official delegation about the new president , President Trump had a deeply rooted negative view on ukraine rooted in the past. He was receiving other information from other sources including mayor giuliani that was more negative, causing him to retain this negative view. Within a few days, on may 29 ng, President Trump signed the congratulatory letter to president zelenskyy which
includesed a visitation to the president to visit him at the white house. However, more than four weeks passed and we could not nail down a date for the meeting. I kaum to believe that long held negative view was causing hesitation in actually scheduling the meeting. Much as we had seen in our oval office discussion. After weeks of reassuring the ukrainians that it was just a scheduling issue, i decided to tell president zelenskyy we had a problem with the reaching President Trump from mayor giuliani. I did so in a bilateral meeting at a conference on ukrainian economic reform in toronto on july 2nd, 2019, where i led the u. S. Delegation. I suggested he call President Trump directly in order to renew their personal relationship and to assure President Trump that he was committed to investigating and Fighting Corruption, thing onz which president zelenskyy based the president ial campaign. I was convinced that getting the two president s to talk with each other would overcome the negative perception of ukraine that President Trump still harbored. President zelenskyys senior aide approached me several days later to ask to be connected to mayor giuliani. I agreed to make that connection. I thought he wanted to convince those that a anything testify narrative about ukraine that times have changed and that under president Zelenskyy Ukraine is worthy of u. S. Support. Ukrainians believe if they can get their own narrative across in a way that convinced mayor giuliani that they were serious about Fighting Corruption and advancing reform, mayor giuliani would convey that assessment to President Trump thus correcting the previous negative narrative. That made since to me and i tried to be helpful. I made clear he was a private citizen and not representing the u. S. Government n my conversations with mayor giuliani, i never considered him to be speaking on the president s behalf or giving instructions, rather the Information Flow was the other way. From ukraine to mayor giuliani in the hopes that this would clear up the information reaching President Trump. I wrote to mayor giuliani to seek to together and we met for breakfast for a longer discussion. At that meeting, i told mr. Giuliani in my view the Prosecutor General with whom he had been speaking was not credible and was acting in a selfserving capacity. To my surprise, mayor giuliani said that he already come to that same conclusion. Mr. Giuliani also mentioned both the accusations about Vice President biden and about interference in the 2016 election and stressed that all he wanted to see was for ukraine
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.