The center for Public Integrity provide us with a new timeline as to when the Trump Administration moved to suspend military assistance to ukraine. This is important. They include, one, that White House Budget Office official Michael Duffy said to a top pentagon official on july 25th, just 90 minutes after President Trump finished his call with ukraines president. Duffy wrote in that email, based on the guidance i have received and in light of the administrations plans to review assistance to ukraine, please hold off on any Additional Defense Department obligations of these funds pending direction from that process. The White House Budget Office responded to nbc news in a statement. It is reckless to tie the hold of funds to a phone call, as has been established and publiclyreported, the hold was announced in an interagency meeting on july 18th. All right. For more on this, lets go straight to nbcs Heidi Przybyla. Heidi, tell me where the information weve learned from these documents fit into the timeline of events surrounding the hold on that military aid to ukraine, which was approved by congress. This is a huge timeline data point, ali, because what you see here is that even though the white house is accurate there. That this hold had been discussed previously. This is telling us that 90 minutes after the president asked president zelensky to investigate joe bidens son, that that hold which had been discussed was then formalized and people were told to keep it under wraps. Essentially, to keep quiet about it. Then, very important data point, within 24 hours of that, the very next day, you have firsthand testimony that the president was confirming with Eu AmbassadorGordon Sondland that president zelensky had acquiesced. He had agreed to do those investigations. That is firsthand testimony from david holmes. So what does this all tell us . It tells us that there are critical documents that are being withheld about how all of this went down. About the fact that even though republicans are telling us that there was no conditionality, that you have within a 48hour timeframe, the ask for investigations, the hold being formalized. And then the you know, ukrainians agreeing to those investigations. Heres the question. What weve got information thats in those emails thats not in the Public Record because mike duffy, whos on one of those emails was not allowed to testify. It would open up a whole new range of questions. What can be done about that . Because this is relevant to the impeachment discussion. Its relevant to the trial in the senate. But these are documents that came from the center for Public Integrity. Theyre not in the record. Well, this illustrates why Speaker Pelosi is doing what shes doing, ali. Because she knows that once she sends those articles over to the gopcontrolled senate, she loses any power to dictate which witnesses would be called, if any witnesses would be called. So what would have to happen is that a handful of republicans would have to join with democrats and dig in. And say not only do we want witnesses but we want these witnesses that we consider material to this case. And so Speaker Pelosi is saying, look, this is not 1999 when we all agreed or in the senate you agreed on logistics. And then later, had a partisan battle over witnesses. Because here, we have almost a complete stonewall of any documents and witnesses who are firsthand to all of this. We know, for instance, that john bolton quit one day after that whole after that after that hold or after the whistleblower came out. And hes saying that he has Additional Information through his lawyer. We know that Mick Mulvaney is sitting on more of these emails because so many of the emails that were sent through that foia were blacked out. Heidi, thank you for reporting on this. Hi Heidi Przybyla is our reporter in washington. As President Trump awaits trial in the senate, his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani is still moving ahead with his investigation into allegations of Vice President joe biden and former ambassador to ukraine, marie yovanovitch. Traveling to ukraine to find evidence to support his narrative that democrats, not the president , are the ones guilty of obstruction and colluding with a foreign power to influence elections. He claims he has found proof to back up new claims against key players in the saga. Joining me now is the reporter who had an inside look at jeweljewehis efforts. So the first claim, ali, has to do with 3. 5 billion that giuliani and some of his Associates Say was corrupt and was laundered having to do with u. S. Dollars given to ukraine. Now, we looked into this and the u. S. Has never given 3. 5 billion to ukraine. Not even israel gets that much. It was actually, i think, upwards of 5 billion that he suggested had been had been laundered. But the ukrainian Auditors Agency actually found that that money wasnt spent as effectively as possible. But not that it was laundered or somehow used in a corrupt fashion. And the second claim has to do with 7. 5 billion that he says was laundered out of ukraine by the former president. But we talked to the Investment Firm thats at play here. Franklin templeton. They said the money went the other direction. From the u. S. To ukraines government in bonds that Frank Templeton had purchased and later sold. So that one doesnt make a lot of sense. And then the third bucket of allegations has to do with four wouldbe ukrainian whistleblowers that Rudy Giuliani says wanted to come to the u. S. To talk about corruption. But that former ambassador yovanovitch blocked their visas. Now, visa applications are confidential. So we dont have full insight into what happened there. But we know that at least one of these potential witnesses, former prosecutor viktor shokin, yovanovitch testified that his visa was denied not because he wanted to come and talk about corruption. But because he, in fact, was known to have engaged in known corrupt activities. Ali. Whats giuliani trying to do here . I mean, whats he doing . What is he getting for this . Is he working with the president for this . Is someone paying him . Is this in anticipation that he might be charged with something . He certainly could be because we know that he has been under investigation by federal authorities for his work related to ukraine. But what hes trying to do here is take the exact narrative that democrats have used against trump. That, essentially, they were trying to abuse their power. That trump was trying to use his power to pressure ukraine for negotiations. Flip the entire script to make it that democrats and the obama administration, under joe biden in particular, were abusing their power. Trying to cover things up. So hes trying to give an argument that its, essentially, democrats guilty of all the things democrats say trump was guilty of. And we dont know if thats going to be believed by everybody but its certainly giving fodder to the president s base. Josh, good to see you. Nbc News National political reporter. All right. Senators are preparing for President Trumps trial even though House Speaker nancy pelosi has not sent the articles of impeachment to the other side of the capitol. Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer sent a letter to all of his colleagues today urging them to heed his call for documents and witness testimony. To help ensure a fair senate trial. The specific sets of documents hes calling for include records on President Trumps phone calls with ukraines president in april and july. The whistleblower complaint. The suspension of military aid to ukraine. And communications between state Department Officials and Ukrainian Government officials. Joining me now is Florida Democratic congresswoman val demings who sits on both the intelligence and the judiciary committees. Both committees that were instrumental in the impeachment activities. Lets talk a little about what what is what the goal is here. Nancy pelosi has been accused of being scared. Being in over her head by republicans. But shes actually using some leverage here by not sending this over to the senate. Well, first of all, good to be with you. And let me just say this. When i heard the comments about Speaker Pelosi being afraid, i was almost laughable. What i can tell you is that shes certainly not afraid. Shes pretty fearless. Shes strategic and i believe that this move to hold on to the articles of impeachment, until you know the rules of engagement, are quite reasonable. Leader mcconnell has made it quite clear that he is going to coordinate, step by step, with the white house, with the president. That there would be no daylight between them. Never heard anything like that before. We certainly didnt hear it in 1999. But i believe the speakers move is very strategic, very smart. And well see where this takes us. There is something very factual about this. And that is you, on the house side, provide the managers of the impeachment, the socalled prosecutors who will make the case in the trial. And Speaker Pelosi is saying until i know what type of trial it is and what youre going to be using as evidence, and who youre going to be calling as witnesses, i cant make my decision as to who the managers are who would represent the house. Which are really the the prosecutors in this case. Yeah. I mean, i think it makes sorry. Go ahead. I think it makes great sense that you have to know the rules of engagement. You have to know what the process is going to be moving forward in this trial. We know that every senator will take an oath of impartiality. Which leader mcconnell has already given all indications that hes going to try to sabotage that. So it just makes sense before the speaker picks her team, that she knows what skills, talents, and abilities, you know, various experiences that she will need based on those rules of engagement. Congresswoman, i want to ask you another story based on the district that you represent. You want to close a loophole that allowed the Royal Saudi Air force officer to buy the gun that investigators say he used to kill three people and injure eight others at the Pensacola Naval air station earlier this month. Now, federal law generally prevents people who come to the u. S. On nonimmigrant visas from having guns. But there are, as you know, some exceptions. If a person is an official representative of a foreign government. If a person is Law Enforcement from a friendly government in the United States on business. If the person has a valid hunting license. And foreign nationals can petition the attorney general to purchase or possess a firearm if they resided in the United States for six months or more. Now, the authorities are saying that this suspect was able to get a florida hunting license last july. And he used that to legally purchase a handgun that he used in the pensacola shooting. Based on all that, what changes do you think make sense as a result of this shooting . And and would they make a difference . Well, first of all, my heart just goes out to those families that were impacted by this very, very tragic shooting. And i do think preliminary investigation shows that there was no glaring threats or loopholes or deficiencies within the regulation. But what we are asking for is that regardless of who you are, if youre on that list of those that are exempt. Whether youre in Law Enforcement or whether youre just looking to come to our country for recreational purposes, then you will have to be cleared by the state department. We believe that this extra procedure will certainly help to prevent tragedies like this from occurring in the future. Is is the problem a weakness in federal law . Or, look, weve seen a lot of examples in florida where people can get a gun in florida more easily than they can in many states. Is it a state matter that needs to be dealt with . We believe that the federal government, just as we do with gun control, gun reduction legislation in general, i know that theres this push to leave it up to the states. But we believe that the federal government has a major role to play in terms of developing standards, if you will, that would apply throughout the nation to prevent instances like this from happening in the future. And to close loopholes like this. While much, as you know, is left up to the state, we believe that this is one that would be better served if the state department played a greater role. Is there some chance of this sort of thing getting all the way through . Because you, democrats in congress, passed a background check law i think in february or Something Like that. And theres no sign of it getting through the United States congress. Let me say this one has bipartisan support. Im joined by former sheriff John Rutherford out of north florida. And in this particular case, when we are inviting persons over who will have the ability to carry firearms, i think there is bipartisan agreement that we need to come together and do more than we have done to make sure that shootings on military bases and other places do not happen in this country. Congressman val demings. Congresswoman val demings. Good to see you. Thank you. Saudi rainia sentences five people to death in the killing of Washington Post columnist while clearing two of the most senior officials implicated in the case. Were looking at what more this tells us about the saudis position on the murder. Well talk about that after the break. Plus, a desperate and public plea to President Trump supporters to defend with credibility their opposition to his impeachment. Youre watching msnbc. Frustrated that everyday activities cause wrinkles and theres nothing you can do about it . Now theres a solution downy wrinkleguard is a fabric conditioner that helps protect you from wrinkles all day. Just pour the dye free liquid into the rinse dispenser. After a day of wear, pants washed with downy wrinkleguard and detergent are virtually wrinkle free. It even comes unscented. If you dont love downy wrinkleguard, well give you your money back. Arabia has sentenced five people to death in the murder of the Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi. The Trump Administration is calling it an important step, although we should note the cia has determined that the saudi crowned prince mohammad bin salman ordered his assassination. A court in saudi arabia sentenced the five for, quote, committing and directly participating in his murder. Three others were convicted for their role in quote covering up the killing. The publisher of the Washington Post responded the complete lack of transparency and the saudi governments refusal to cooperate with independent investigators suggests that this was merely a sham trial. Those ultimately responsible at the highest level of the saudi government continue to escape responsibility for the brutal murder of Jamal Khashoggi. Joining me now, former fbi special agent. He serves as a member of the Homeland Security advisory council. And this is what you have been trained to do for a living, investigations. The cia and others have concluded that this assassination, not only was ordered by mohammad bin salman. But couldnt have actually occurred without him or someone very high up in the saudi government knowing about this. And yet, according to nbc reporting, the investigation concluded that the murder was not premeditated and that the perpetrators agreed to kill the journalist when they found it would be too lahard to move himo another election the deputy Public Prosecutor said in a press conference carried by state television. Im not an investigator by profession. That doesnt seem to jive. Well, you know, the cia, as you mentioned, basically assessed that mohammad bin salman was directly involved in this. The u. S. Government, state Department Treasury sanctioned individuals who we believe are connected to the murder. To include two of the senior advisors of mohammad bin salman. Katani and who is also the counsel general. None of them were actually part of the indictment or part of the prosecution. Now, another person who in the cia and a lot of other individuals believe was the mastermind of the whole operation, a guy also found not guilty even though he was the number two in the Intelligence Service who ran the operation. So a lot of investigations happened not only by the cia but also by other entities around the world. To include the United Nation and to include turkey and others. And their conclusions were very different than the conclusion of this court. The saudis have been having a lot of difficulties in dealin