Anybody else. Im going to read from the transcript here. Why didnt you go to your direct report, mr. Morrison, your response, because mr. Eisenberg had told me to take my concerns to him. And then i asked you, did mr. Eisenberg tell you not to report, to go around mr. Morrison . And you said, actually, he did say that, i shouldnt talk to any other people. Is that right . Yes, but theres a whole theres a period of time in there between when i spoke to him and when he circled back around. It wasnt that long a period of time, but it was enough time for me to enough time for you to go to talk to someone who you wont tell us who it is, right . Ive been instructed not to, representative jordan. Heres what im getting. The lawyer told you not talk to any other people, and you interpret that as not talking to your boss, but you talk to your brother, you talk to the lawyers, you talk to scare keec kent and talk to the one guy schiff wont let us tell you who it is. Representative jordan, i did my job. Im not saying you didnt. All im saying is the
instructions from the lawyer was, you shouldnt talk to anybody, and you interpret that as dont talk to my boss, but im going to go talk to someone that we cant even ask you who that individual is. That is incorrect. Well, i just read what you said. That is incorrect. Zblis i shouldnt talk to any other people. Im sorry, chairman, but that sequence is not the way it played out. Im reading from the transcript, Colonel Vindman. Let Colonel Vindman answer. The sequence played out where immediately afterwards, i expressed my concerns, i duty my coordination function, mr. Eisenberg circled back around and told me not to talk to anybody else. In that period of time oh, thats when it happened. Thats when you talked to someone. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Colonel vindman, lets go back to that pair of meetings on pair on july 10th where you witnessed ambassador sondland inform the ukrainian officials that as a prerequisite to a white house meeting, between the two president s, quote, ukraine yaia
would have to deliver an investigation into the bidens, end quote. You said that ambassador sondland was, quote, calling for an investigation that didnt exist into the bidens and burisma. Is that correct . That is correct. Its that same afternoon that you went to mr. Eisenberg, the counsel . That meeting occurred within the afternoon, and it was within a couple of hours i spoke to mr. Eisenberg. How did he react . He was cool, calm, and colle collected. He took notes and said he would look into it. And did he not also tell you to feel free to come back if you had additional concerns . He did. Ambassador sondland had told you that his request to the ukrainians had been coordinated with the Chief Of Staff, acting Chief Of Staff, mick mulvaney. Did you report that to mr. Eisenberg. I did. And what was his reaction . He took notes and he said he was going to hell follow up or look into it. I dont recall exactly what he said. Colonel, you have also testified on the July 25th Call between the two president s, quote, there was no doubt, end quote, that President Trump asked for investigations into the 2016 election and Vice President bidens son in return for a white house meeting. Within an hour of that call, you reported that to mr. Eisenberg, did you not item i did. Went back to him as he suggested would be appropriate. Hes an Assistant To The President , it was less a suggestion and more an instruction. Did you tell the lawyers that President Trump asked president zelensky to speak to mr. Giuliani . Yes. And the lawyers, it was at this point, told you not to talk to anyone else . That is that is not correct with regards to timing. They didnt follow they didnt circle back around. What ended up happening is, in my coordination role, i spoke to state win spoke
state, i spoke to a member of the Intelligence Community, and the general counsel from one of the intelligence bodies notified mr. Eisenberg that there was, you know, that there was information on the call, on the July 25th Call. At that point, mr. Eisenberg told me that i shouldnt talk to anybody else about it. Colonel, i want to go back to 2014 and iraq, when you were blown up. I presume that given the point in your Military Career and what else was going on in the world, that upon recovery there was the very real prospect or possibility that you might once again find yourself in harms way. Is that correct . Yes, congressman. It happened in 2004, but yes. 04, excuse me, thank you. Did you consider leaving the Military Service at that point . No. Frankly, congressman, i suffered light wounds. I was fortunate compared to my counterparts in the same vehicle. And i returned to duty, i think it may have been that same day. But you could have been subjected to additional harm. You chose to continue service in uniform. I continued to serve in combat for the remaining 10 or 11 months of the tour. You know, colonel, i have to say, i find it a rich, but incredibly painful irony that within a week of the president , contrary to all advice of his senior military officials, he pardons those who are convicted of war crimes, which was widely decried in the military community. Within the week of him doing that, hes engaged in an effort, and allies on his behalf, including some here today, to demean your record of service and the sacrifice and the contribution you have made. Indeed, sir, less than 20
minutes ago, the white house officially quoted out, out of context, the comments referred to earlier by mr. Morrison in your judgment. I can only conclude, sir, that what we thought was just the president as the subject of our deliberations and this inquiry, isnt sufficient to capture whats happening here. Indeed, what subject to this inquiry, and what is at peril is our constitution and the very values upon which it is based. I want to thank you for your service, but you know, thank you doesnt cut it. Please know however that it comes from the bottom of my heart and i know on the bottoms of the heart of countless other americans. Thank you for your service, sir. Thank you. I yield back. Mr. Jordan . Thank you, mr. Chairman. Sunday, sunday the speaker of
the United States house of representatives called the president of the United States an imposter. The speaker of the house called the president an imposter. The a guy 63 Million People voted more. The guy who won an Electoral College landslide, the speaker calls an imposter. Thats whats happened to our country, to this congress. The speakers statement says it all. The democrats have never accepted the will of the American People. Democrats dont trust the American People. The American People who wanted to send someone to this town who was willing to shake it up a bit. They dont trust that. And they have tried to do everything they can to undo what the American People decided on november 8th, 2016. Theyve been out to get the president since the day he was elected. The whistleblowers lawyer, the whistleblowers legal team said
this january 30th, 2017 the president had been in office about a week, coup has started. First of many steps. Next sentence, impeachment will follow ultimately. I guess were in the final step. Started three and a half years ago. Congressman talib started this congress, first day of congress said, impeach the president. Representative green said, if we dont impeach him, the president is going to win reelection. Weve got to do it. Most importantly, most importantly, five Democrat Members of this committee voted to move forward with impeachment before the phone call ever happened. The truth is, the attacks actually started before, before the inauguration, even before the election. The Ranking Member talked about this in his Opening Statement. July 2016, fbi opens an investigation into the socalled trump Russia Coordination Collusion Which was never there. Opened an investigation, spied on two american citizens associated with the president ial campaign. Membership guess is, thats probably never happened in american history, but they did it and for ten months, jim comeys Fbi Investigatied the president. Guess what . After ten months, they had nothing and you know how we know that . When we deposed mr. Comey last congress, he told us they didnt have a thing. No matter. Special counsel mueller gets appointed and they do a twoyear, 40 million, 19lawyer, unbelievable investigation and guess what . they come back and they got nothing. But the democrats dont care. So now we get this. A bunch of depositions in the bunker in the basement of the capitol, witnesses who arent allowed to answer questions about who they talked to about the phone call. We get this. All based on some anonymous whistleblower, no firsthand knowledge, biased against the president. These facts have never changed. We learned these right away. Who worked with Vice President biden. Who wrote a memo the day after somebody talked to him about the call, but waited 18 days to file a complaint. 18 days to file a complaint. Whatd he do in those 18 days . We all know. Ran off and talked with chairman schiffs staff. And then, hired the legal team that i just talked about, that i just talked about, one of the steps in the whole impeachment coup, as his legal team has said. This is scary, what these guys are putting our country through. It is it is it is sad, it is scary, it is wrong. And the good news, the American People see through it all. They know the facts are on the president s side, as representative stefanick said,
four facts will never change we got the transcript, which they never thought the president would release, shows no coordination, no conditionality, no linkage. We got the two guys on the call, President Trump, president zelensky, who have said, nothing wrong, no pressure, no pushing here. We have the ukrainians who didnt know the aid was held up at the time of the call. And we have one witness to yet tell us any evidence from anyone that president zelensky did anything on investigations to get the aid released. Those facts will never chaunge. The facts are on the president s side, the process is certainly not. It has been the most unfair process we have ever seen and the American People understand it. Thoepz 63 million americans, they understand it and frankly, i think a lot of others do as well. They see this for what it is, and they know this is wrong, especially wrong, just 11 months before the next election. I yield back. Mr. Welch . Thank you. What this hearing is about, i think, was best stated by Colonel Vindmans Opening Statement. The question before us is this. Is it improper for the president of the United States to demand a Foreign Government investigate a United States citizen and political opponent . C have well stated. I just listened to mr. Jordan, as you did as well, and i heard his criticisms of the process. Nothing really happened. A lot of people are out to get the president. I didnt hear an answer to the question as to whether its proper for the president of the United States to demand a Foreign Government to investigate a u. S. Citizen and political opponent. And to date, i havent heard any one of my republican colleagues address that question. Colonel vindman and miss williams, thank you. Im going to ask some questions that go through the background. Whats come out during this process is that we had two ukraine policyies. One was bipartisan and longstanding. One was to assist itself which had freed itself from the corruption of russia. Is that a fair statement . I think thats a fair characterization. And to give folks pa reminder of the extent of corruption. By the way, a legacy of Putins Russia is that your understanding when your prior president , mr. Yanukovych, fled to russia, into the arms of mr. Putin, he took with him 30
billion to 40 billion of that impoverished country. There are different estimates, but its on that scale, yes. Vast scale for a poor country. And is it your understanding that powerless, but motivated ukrainians rose up in protest to this incredible graft and theft and abuse by their president. That is correct. And that was in the it was called the mayden revolution, the revolution of dignity, correct . Correct. And young people went into that square in Downtown Kyiv and demonstrated for months, correct . Correct. And a hundred died. 106 young people died and older people died, correct . That was in between february 18, 2014, and february 22. Is that correct . Correct. 106 died, including people who were shot by snipers, kids, and yanukovych had put snipers on the rooftops of buildings to shoot into that square and kill, murder, slaughter, those young people. Is that your understanding . That is correct. In our bipartisan support, and by the way, i want to say to my republican Colleaguese Scoll lot of leadership of this bipartisan support came from our side. Thank you. But our whole commitment was to get rid of corruption and to stop that russian aggression. Is that correct . That amounts to some of the key pillars. Thats right. And the giuliani, sondeman and it appears trump policy was not about that, but it was about investigations into a political opponent, correct . Ill take that question back. We know it. And you know, ill say this to President Trump. You want to investigate joe biden, you want to investigate hunter biden . Go at it . Do it. Do it hard. Do it dirty, do it the way you do it. Just dont do by asking a foreign leader to help you in your campaign. Thats your job. Its not his. My goal in these hearings is two things. One is to get an answer to Colonel Vindmans question. And the second, coming out of that is for us, as a congress, to return to the ukraine policy that nancy pelosi and Kevin Mccarthy both support. Its not investigations. Its the restoration of democracy in ukraine and the resistance of russian aggression. I yield back. Mr. Maloney . Thank you both for being here. You know, Lieutenant Colonel vindman, this may be one of your first congressional hearings like this, so hope to be the last. I cant blame you for feeling that way, sir. Particularly when ive been sitting here listening to my republican colleagues, one of the advantages of being down here at the kids table is that you get to hear the folks above you ask their questions. And ive been along closely to my republican colleagues and ive heard them say just about everything except to contradict any of the Substantiative Testimony youve both given. You may have notice, theres been a lot of complaints and theres been a lot of insinuations and theres been a lot of suggestions, maybe, that your service is somehow not, not to be trusted. And yet you were treated to questions about your loyalty because of some halfbaked job
offer, i guess the ukrainians made you, which of course you dutifully reported. I guess mr. Castor is implying that maybe youve got some dual loyalty, which is of course an old smear weve heard many times in our history. They try to demean you as though maybe youve overstated your importance of your job, but of course, youre the guy on the National Security council responsible for directing ukrainian policy. Weve heard them air out some allegations with no basis in proof, but they want to get them out there and hope maybe some of those strands of spaghetti, i guess, will stick on the wall, if they keep throwing them. Weve even had a member of this Committee Question this is my favorite question why you would wear your Dress Uniform today. Even though that Dress Uniform includes a breast plate that has a Combat Infantry Badge on it and a purple heart medal ribbon. It seems like if anybody gets to wear the uniform, its somebody whos got a breast plate with those congressmenatimmendations. So lets do it again. Lets do the substance. Can we do that . Because weve had a lot of dust kicked up. Miss williams, you heard the call with your own ears, right . Yes, sir. Not secondhand, not hearsay. You heard the president speak. You heard his voice on the call. Correct. And your conclusion was what he said about investigating the bidens, was, your words, unusual and inappropriate, i believe. Am i right . That was my testimony. And mr. Vindman, you were treated to a July 10th Meeting in the white house where you heard ambassador sondland Raise Investigations conditioning a white house meeting on that, investigations that you thought were unduly political, i believe thats how you described them, and you went to nsc counsel and reported it, right . Correct. And later you two were on the white house call, am i right, you heard it with your own ears . Correct. Not secondhand, you heard the president s voice on the call . I did. And you heard him raise that subject again, that ambassador sondland had raised before,
about investigating the bidens,