Skip to main content

tv   NEWSHOUR  Al Jazeera  November 20, 2019 6:00pm-7:01pm +03

6:00 pm
nor did he discuss any request to investigate vice president biden which we all later learned was discussed on the joint 25th call and this is consistent with the reported comments from ambassadors volcker and taylor after this alleged scheme meeting i also met with selenski senior aide andre your mac i don't recall the specifics of our conversation but i believe the issue of investigations was probably a part of that agenda our meeting also on july 26th shortly after our kiev meetings i spoke by phone with president trump the white house which has finally finally shared certain call dates and times with my attorneys confirms this the call lasted 5 minutes i remember i was at a restaurant in kiev and i have no reason to doubt that this conversation included the subject of investigations again given mr giuliani's demand that president
6:01 pm
selenski make a public statement about investigations i knew that investigations were important to president trump we did not discuss any classified information other witnesses have recently shared their recollection of overhearing this call for the most part i have no reason to doubt their accounts it's true that the president speaks loudly at times and it's also true i think we primarily discussed asap rocky it's true that the president likes to use colorful language anyone who has met with him it for any reasonable amount of time knows this well i cannot remember the precise details again the white house has not allowed me to see any readouts of that call and the july 26th call did not strike me as significant at the time actually actually i would have been more surprised. if president trump had not
6:02 pm
mentioned investigations particularly given what we were hearing from mr giuliani about the president's concerns however i have no recollection of discussing vice president biden or his son on that call or after the call and i know that members of this committee frequently framed these complicated issues in the form of a simple question was there a quid pro quo as i testified previously with regard to the requested white house call and the white house meeting the answer is yes mr giuliani conveyed to secretary perry ambassador volcker and others that president trump wanted a public statement from president selenski committing to investigations of brewery smile and the 2016 election mr giuliani expressed those requests directly to the ukrainians and mr giuliani also expressed those requests directly to us we all
6:03 pm
understood that these prerequisites for the white house call and the right white house meeting reflected president trump's desires and requirements within my state department e-mails there is a july 19th e-mail this e-mail was sent this e-mail was sent to secretary pompei o secretary perry bryan mccormick who is secretary perry is chief of staff at the time miss canada who is the acting a pardon me who is the executive secretary at 4 secretary pompei o chief of staff mulvaney and mr maule deniz senior advisor rob blair a lot of senior officials a lot of senior officials here is my exact quote from that e-mail i talk to as
6:04 pm
a lansky just now he is prepared to receive poetess call. will assure him that he intends to run a fully transparent investigation and will turn over every stone he would greatly appreciate a call prior to sunday so that he can put out some media about a friendly and productive call no details prior to ukraine election on sunday chief of staff from all veiny responded i asked the n.s.c. to set it up for tomorrow everyone was in the loop it was no secret everyone was informed via email on july 19th days before the presidential call as i communicated to the team i told president selenski in advance that assurances to run
6:05 pm
a fully transparent investigation and turn over every stone were necessary in his call with president trump on july 19th in a whatsapp message between ambassador taylor ambassador volker and me bassett or vole volcker stated had breakfast with rudy this morning that's ambassador bulker and rudy giuliani keying up call with your mac monday at senior advisor andre your mac must have helped most important is for us as a lenski to say that he will help investigation and address any specific personnel issues if there are any on august 10th the next day mr your mac texted me once we have a date which is the date for the white house meeting we will call for a press briefing announcing upcoming visit and outlining vision for the reboot of
6:06 pm
the u.s. ukraine relationship including among other things aris maya and election meddling in investigations this is from mr your mac to me. the following day august 11th and this is critical i sent an email to councilor brecht bull and lisa khanna lisa can i was frequently used as the pathway to secretary pompei o as sometimes he preferred to receive his emails through her she would print them out and put them in front of him with the subject ukraine i wrote mike referring to mike pompei o kurt and i negotiated a statement from selenski to be delivered for our review in a day or 2 the contents will hopefully make the boss happy enough the boss being
6:07 pm
the president to authorize an invitation selenski plans to have a big press or press conference on the openness subject including specifics next week all of which referred to the 2016 and the been recent this can i replied gordon i'll pass to the secretary thank you again everyone was in the loop curiously and this was very interesting to me on august 26th shortly before his visit to kiev ambassador bolton is office requested mr giuliani's contact information for me i sent him bassett or bolton the information directly they requested mr giuliani's contact information on august
6:08 pm
26th i was 1st informed that the white house was withholding security aid to ukraine during conversations with them bassett or taylor on july 18th 2019. however as i testified before i was never able to obtain a clear answer regarding the specific reason for the hold whether it was bureaucratic in nature which often happens or reflected some other concern in the interagency process i never participated in any of the subsequent d.o.d. or d.o.'s review meetings that others have described so i can't speak to what was discussed in those meetings nonetheless before the september 1st warsaw meeting the ukrainians had become aware that security funds had yet to be dispersed
6:09 pm
in the absence of any credible explanation for the hold i came to the conclusion that the aid like the white house visit was jeopardized in preparation for the september 1 warsaw meeting i asked secretary pompei 0 whether a face to face conversation between trump and selenski would help to break the logjam and this was when president trump was still intending to travel to warsaw specifically on august 22nd i emailed secretary pompei o directly copying secretary at cana i wrote this is my email to secretary pompei oh should we block time in warsaw for a short polish side for potest to meet selenski i would ask selenski
6:10 pm
to look him in the eye and tell him that once ukraine's new justice folks are in place in mid september that selenski he's a lansky should be able to move forward publicly and with confidence on those issues of importance to posts in the us hopefully that will help break the logjam the secretary replied yes. i followed up the next day asking to get 10 to 15 minutes on the warsaw schedule for this i said we'd like to know when it's locked so that i can tell is a lansky and brief him executive secretary can replied i will try for sure moreover given my concerns about the security aide i have no reason to dispute that portion of senator johnson's recent letter in which he recalls conversations he and i had on our august 30th by the end of august my belief was that if you crane did
6:11 pm
something to demonstrate a serious intention to fight corruption and specifically addressing barry sma and the 2016 then the hold on military aid would be lifted there was a september 1st meeting with president selenski in warsaw unfortunately president trumps attendance of the warsaw meeting was cancelled due to hurricane dorian vice president pence attended instead i mention to vice president pence before the meetings with the ukrainians that i had concerns that the delay in aid had become tied to the issue of investigations i recall mentioning that before the lenski meeting during the actual meeting president selenski raised the issue of security assistance directly with vice president hands and the vice president said that he would speak to president trump about it based on my previous communication with
6:12 pm
secretary pompei o i felt comfortable sharing my concerns with mr your mac. it was a very very brief pulis side conversation that happened within a few seconds i told mr your mac that i believe that the resumption of u.s. aid would likely not occur until ukraine took some kind of action on the public statement that we had been discussing for many weeks. as my other state department colleagues have testified this security aid was critical to ukraine's defense and should not have been delayed i expressed this view to many during this period but my goal at the time was to do it was necessary to get the aid released to break the logjam i believe that the public statement we had been discussing for weeks was essential to advancing that goal you know i really regret that the ukrainians were placed in that predicament but i do not regret doing what i could
6:13 pm
to try to break the logjam and to solve the problem i mentioned at the outset that throughout these events we kept state department leadership and others apprised of what we were doing state department was fully supportive of our engagement in ukraine efforts and was aware that a commitment to investigations was among the issues we were pursuing to provide just 2 examples on june 5th the day after the us e.u. mission hosted our independence day we did it a month early acting assistant secretary phil reeker sent an e-mail to me to secretary perry and to others forwarding some positive media coverage of president selenski as attendance at our event mr reeker wrote and i quote this headline underscores the importance and timeliness of selenski is visit to brussels and the
6:14 pm
critical and the critical perhaps historic role of the dinner and engagement gordon coordinated thank you for your participation and dedication to this effort months later on september 3rd i sent secretary pompei o an e-mail to express my appreciation for his joining a series of meetings in brussels following the warsaw trip i wrote. mike thanks for schlepping to europe i think it was really important and the chemistry seems promising really appreciated secretary pompei i replied the next day on wednesday september 4th quote all good you're doing great work he banging away state department leadership expressed total support for our efforts to engage the new ukrainian administration look i have never doubted the strategic
6:15 pm
value of strengthening our alliance with ukraine and at all times at all times our efforts were in good faith and fully transparent to those tasked with overseeing them our efforts were reported and approved and not once do i recall encountering an objection remains an honor to serve the people of the united states as their united states ambassador to the european union i look forward to answering the committee's questions thank you we will now proceed the 1st round of questions as detailed a member provided the committee members of the 45 minutes of questions conducted by the chairman a majority counsel fall by 45 minutes for the ranking member or minority counsel following them unless i specify additional equal time for extent of questioning will proceed on of the 5 minute rule and every member will have the chance to ask
6:16 pm
questions or recognize myself or a majority counsel for the 1st round of questions isis online and there's a lot of new material in your opening statement for us to get through but i want to start with a few. questions before a passing over to mr goldman in your deposition you testified that you found yourself on a continuum that became more insidious over time can you describe what you mean by this continuum of insidiousness. well mr chairman when we left the oval office i believe on may 23rd. the request was very generic for an investigation of corruption in a very vanilla sense and dealing with some of the oligarch problems in ukraine which were longstanding problems and then as time went on. more specific items got added to the menu including the upper recent and 2016
6:17 pm
election meddling specifically the d.n.c. service specifically and over this over this continue on. it became more and more difficult to secure the white house meeting because more conditions were being placed on the white house meeting and then of course on july 25th although you were not privy to the call another condition was added that being the investigation of the bidens i was not privy to the call and i did not know that the condition of investigating the bidens was a condition correct you saw that in the call records wrecked it was not in any record i received when you did yes see i saw that in september correct so under on this continuum the beginning of the continuum begins on may 23rd when the president structured to talk to rudi correct and you understood that as
6:18 pm
a direction by the president that you needed to satisfy the concerns that rudy giuliani would express to you about what the president wanted ukraine not to be to the entire group volker perry and myself correct now in your opening statement you confirmed that there was a quid pro quo between the white house meeting and the investigations into barisan and the 2016 election that giuliani was publicly promoting is that right right and in fact you say that other senior officials in the state department. and the chief of staff's office including mick mulvaney secretary pompei o were aware of this quid pro quo that in order to get the white house meeting they were going to have to be these investigations the president wanted her act and those again are investigations into 2016 and verismo slash the bidens 2016 barista biden's did not come up but you would ultimately learn that there is
6:19 pm
a moment the bidens when you saw the call records of course today i know exactly what it means i didn't know at the time and then on july 26th you confirm you did indeed have the conversation with president trump from a restaurant and key that david holmes testified about last week is that right correct and you have no doubt no reason to doubt mr holmes recounting of your conversation with the president. the only part of mr holmes recounting that i take exception with is i do not recall mentioning the bidens that did not enter my mind it was a recent 2016 election year no reason to believe that mr holmes would make that up if that's what he recalls you saying you have no reason to question i do i don't recall saying by i never recalled saying by but the rest of mr holmes recollection is consistent with your own well i can't
6:20 pm
testify as to what mr holmes might or might not have heard through the phone i don't know how he heard the conversation are you familiar with this testimony vaguely yes and the only exception you take is to the mention of the name by correct and i think you said in your testimony this morning that not only is it correct that the president brought up with you investigations on the phone the day after the july 25th call but you would have been surprised i did not brought that up as a right right because we had been hearing about it from rudy and we presumed rudy was getting it from the president so it seemed like a logical conclusion. as holmes also testified that you told him president trump doesn't care about ukraine only cares about big stuff that relates to him personally. i take it from your comment you don't dispute that part of the conversation well he made that clear in the may 23rd meeting that he was not
6:21 pm
particularly fond of ukraine and we had a lot of heavy lifting to do to get him to engage so you don't dispute that part of mr holmes recollection now in august when you worked with rudy giuliani and a top ukrainian age a draft a public statement for president selenski to issue that includes announcement investigations into bryza you understood that was required by president trump before he would grant a white house meeting to presidents alinsky that's correct and the ukrainians understood that as well i believe they did and you inform secretary pompei oh about that statement as well i did later in august you told secretary pompei oh that president selenski would be prepared to tell president trump that his new justice officials would be able to announce matters of interest of the president which could break the logjam when you say matters of interest of the
6:22 pm
president you mean the investigations that president trump wanted is that right. and that involved 2016 and or the bidens and 16 and verismo and when you're talking here about breaking the long jam you're talking about the log jam of the security systems correct i was talking logjam generically because nothing was moving that included the security assistance that in iraq and based on the context of that e-mail this was not the 1st time you had discussed these investigations with secretary kerry pale as a no he was aware of the connections that you were making between the investigations and the white house meeting and security assistance yes did you ever take issue with you and say that connection is not there iraq. that i recall. you mentioned that
6:23 pm
you also had a conversation with vice president pence for his meeting with president selenski in warsaw and that you raised the concern you had as well that the security assistance was being withheld because of the president's desire to get a commitment from zelinsky to pursue these political investigations what did you say the vice president i was in a briefing with several people and i just spoke up and i said it appears that everything is stalled until this statement gets made something that words to that effect and that's what i believe to be the case based on. you know the work that the 3 of us had been doing volcker perry and myself and the vice president nodded like you know he he heard what i said and that was pretty much it as i recall and you understood that the ukrainians were going to raise the security assistance with the vice president at this meeting i didn't know what they were going to raise but
6:24 pm
they i bet in fact did raise that mr chairman well it was public by that point that there was a hold on the screw systems correct yeah but i didn't know what they were going to raise i didn't get a pretty brief from the ukrainians well you know certainly they were concerned about the hold on the skirt assistance right they were concerned obviously and you wanted to help prepare the vice president for the meeting by letting him know what you thought was responsible for the hold on the security assistance that's fair your call anything else the president vice president said of anonymous said when you made him aware of this fact now i don't have a readout of that meeting so i can't remember anything else. and it was immediately after this meeting between the vice president and zelinsky that you went to speak with your mach and you told him similarly that. in order to release the military assistance they were going to have to publicly announce these investigations yet much has been made of that meeting and it really wasn't a meeting what happened was everyone got up after the bilateral meeting between
6:25 pm
president selenski and vice president pants and people do what they normally do they get up they mill around they shake hands and i don't know if i came over to your mac or he came over to me but he said you know what's going on here and i said i don't know it might all be tied together now i haven't you know i have no idea i was presuming that it was but it was a very short conversation well in that short conversation as you would later relate to mr morris and about your tailor you informed mr your mock of that they would need to invest announce these investigations in order to get the aid to do not well mr your mock was already working on those investigation or on the statement about the investigations and you confirm for him that he needed to get it done if they were going to get the military aid i likely did mr morrison and esther taylor also related the conversation you had with the president following the warsaw meeting in which the president relayed to you that
6:26 pm
there was no quid pro quo but nevertheless unless alinsky went to the mike and announced these investigations they would be a stalemate over the aid is that correct that's correct and that was an actor deflection of your discussion with the president well that e-mail was not artfully written i'm the 1st to admit what i was trying to convey to ambassador taylor after his frantic emails to me and to others about the security assistance which by the way i agreed with them i thought it was a very bad idea to hold that money. i finally called the president i believe it was on the 9th of september i can't find the records and they won't provide them to me but i believe i just asked him an open ended question mr chairman what do you want from ukraine i keep hearing all these different ideas and theories and this and that what do you want and it was a very short abrupt conversation he was not in
6:27 pm
a good mood and he just said i want nothing i want nothing i want no quid pro quo televisa lenski to do the right thing something to that effect so i typed out a text to ambassador taylor in my reason for telling him this was not to defend what the president was saying not to a pint on whether the president was being truthful or untruthful but simply to relay i've got as far as i can go this is the final word that i heard from the president tonight it states if you're still concerned you ambassador taylor is still concerned please get a hold of the secretary maybe he can help but i'm not asking about your text message here but your conversations with mr morris and about to taylor after you spoke with the president either in that hall or in a different call i'm confused mr chairman which conversations with mr morrison and mr tell mr morris and testified that you related a conversation you had with the president in which the president told you no quid
6:28 pm
pro quo but presidents alinsky must go to a microphone and announce these investigations and that he should want to similarly you told investor taylor that while the president said no quid pro quo unless the lewinsky announced these investigations they would be at a stalemate presumably a stalemate over the military assistance you have a reason to question those conversations that mr morrison and bester taylor took notes about. well i think it's tied to my text mr chairman because in my text i think i said something to the effect that. he wants selenski to do what he ran on i believe is transparency cetera et cetera which was my clumsy way of saying he wanted he wanted these announcements to be made we're going to ask for not asking about your text message i'm asking about what you relayed to investor taylor and mr
6:29 pm
morrison about your conversation with the president you know the reason to question their recollection of what you told them. all i can say is that. i expressed what i told or what the president told me in that text and if i had relayed anything other than that was what was in that text i don't recall you don't recall i don't recall you have no reason to question i'm asked or taylor or mr morrison what they wrote in their notes about your conversation with them could you kindly repeat what they wrote i'll have mr goldman go through that with you i'd be great but let me get to the very top line here investor sol and. you've testified that the white house meeting the president's alinsky desperately wanted and that was very important to presidents alinsky was it not absolutely you testified that that meeting was conditioned was
6:30 pm
a quid pro quo for what the president wanted these 2 investigations and that right correct and that everybody knew it correct. now that white house meeting was going to be an official meeting between the 2 presidents correct presumably it would be an oval office meeting hopefully a working meeting yes working meeting so an official act got wrecked. and in order to perform that official act donald trump one of these 2 investigations that would help his reelection campaign correct i can't characterize why he wanted them all i can tell you is this is what we heard from mr giuliani but he had he had to get those 2 investigations if that official act was going to take place correct he had to announce the investigations he didn't actually have to do them as i understood it ok as insolence he had to announce 2 investigations the president want to make a public announcement correct correct and those were of great value to the
6:31 pm
president he was quite insistent upon them and his attorney was insistent upon them i don't want to characterize whether there are value or not value here again through mr giuliani we were led to believe that that's what he wanted when you said that mr giuliani was acting at the president's demand correct right when the president says talk to my personal lawyer mr giuliani we followed his direction and so that official act of that meeting was being conditioned on the performance of these things the president wanted as expressed well directly and through his lawyer rudy giuliani correct as expressed through rudy giuliani correct and they've also testified that your understanding it became your clear understanding that the military assistance was also being withheld pending zelinsky announcing these investigations correct that was my presumption my personal presumption based on the facts at the time nothing was moving and in fact you had
6:32 pm
a discussion communication with the secretary of state which you said that log jam over aid could be lifted if selenski announces investigations right i did not i don't recall saying the logjam over and i recall saying the logjam i don't smell that that's what you've met right ambassador i thought i meant that whatever was holding up the meeting. whatever was holding up our deal with ukraine i was trying to break again i was presuming well here's what you said in your testimony a moment ago ok age 18 but my goal at the time was to do what was necessary to get the aid released to break the logjam ok that's still your testimony right yeah so the military aid is also an official act my right yes this is not present trump's personal bank account he's writing a check from this is 400000000 of u.s.
6:33 pm
taxpayer money is it not absolutely and there was a logjam in which the president would not write that u.s. check you believe until ukraine announced these 2 investigations the president wanted correct that was my belief is to go thank you mr chairman in your opening statement about your son when you you detailed the benefits that you have gained from obtaining some additional documents over the past few weeks is that right. in terms of refreshing my recollection that right because reviewing these documents has helped you to remember the events that were asking about is that correct rock because you acknowledge of course that when you can place a document in a date and a context it helps to jog your memory that's correct and so you would agree that for people unlike yourself who take notes that that is very helpful to
6:34 pm
their own recollection of events right i think ask your question backwards are you saying people that take notes it's helpful to have those documents or people that don't take notes it's all they have those no no you're not a no taker i'm not a no taker never have been but you would agree that people who do take contemporaneous notes generally are more able to remember things then people who don't some yes. and there are additional documents that you've been unable to obtain is that right that's correct and i think you even said in your opening statement that the state department prevented you and your staff from trying to gather more documents is that correct certain documents yes which documents documents i didn't have immediate access to and who at the state department prevented you from doing that you have to ask my counsel he was dealing with them but certainly based on the additional memory that you have gained over the past few
6:35 pm
weeks from reading the testimony of others based on their notes and reviewing your own documents you have remembered a lot more than you did when you were deposed is that right that's correct and one of the things that you have now remember is the discussion that you had with the with president trump on july 26th in that restaurant in kiev right yeah what triggered my memory was someone's reference to asap rocky which was i believe the primary purpose of the phone call certainly so that's one way memory works isn't it and you were sitting in a restaurant with david holmes in kiev right having lunch i think i took the whole team out to lunch after the meeting and it was a meeting a one on one meeting you had with andre yarmuk. again trying to reconstruct a very busy day without the benefit but if someone said i had
6:36 pm
a meeting and i went to the meeting then i'm not going to dispute that and particularly if that person took notes at that meeting correct or sat outside the door when you didn't let them in i have no control over who goes into a meeting in ukraine that was the ukrainians and let a man and you had also met with president saleh among others that day is that right that's correct and you called president trump from your cell phone from the restaurant is that right that's right. and this was not a secure line was it was an open line did you worry that a foreign government may be listening to your phone call with the president the united states well i have unclassified conversations all the time from landlines that are unsecured in cell phones if the topic is not classified and it's up to the president decide what's classified and what's not classified and we were having he
6:37 pm
was aware that it was an open line as well and you don't recall the specifics of holding your phone out far away from your ear as mr holmes testified but you have no reason to question his recollection of that do you i mean it seems a little strange i would hold my phone here i probably had my phone close to my ear and he claims to have overheard part of the conversation and i'm not going to dispute what he did or didn't hear well he also testified that you confirmed to president trump that you were in ukraine at the time and that president selenski quote loves your ass unquote do you recall saying that sounds like something i would say. that's how president trump and i communicate a lot of 4 letter words in this case 3 letter. homes then said that he heard president trump ask quote is he meaning zelinsky going to do the
6:38 pm
investigation to which you replied he's going to do it and then you added the president selenski will do anything that you meaning president trump asked him to do you recall that i probably said something to that effect because i remember the meeting the president our president selenski was very. felicitas is not a good word he was just very willing to work with the united states and was being very amicable and so putting it in trump speak by saying he loves your ass he'll do whatever you want matt that he would really work with us on a whole host of issues he was not only willing he was very eager right it's fair because ukraine depends on the united states as its most significant ally isn't that correct one of its most absolutely. so just so we
6:39 pm
understand you you were in kiev the day after president trump spoke to president selenski on the phone and you now know from reading the call record that in that phone call he requested a favor for president selenski to do investigations related to the bidens and the 2016 election right i do now know that yes and you met with president selenski and his aides on the day after that phone call and then you had a conversation with president trump from your cell phone from a restaurant terrace and he asked you whether police didn't selenski will do the investigations and you responded that he's going to do them or it and that president selenski will do anything us going to do is that an accurate recitation of what happened there i think it could have been words to that effect i don't remember my exact response but you don't have any reason to dispute mr holmes
6:40 pm
recollection correct i won't dispute it but again i don't recall after you hung up with the president mr holmes testified about a conversation that you and he had where he says that you told mr holmes. that the president does not care about ukraine but the president used the more colorful language including a 4 letter word that you just referenced to just reference do you recall saying that to mr holmes again i don't recall my exact words but clearly the president beginning on may 23rd when we met with him in the oval office was not a big fan but he was a big fan of the investigations apparently so and in fact mr holmes said that you that you said that president trump only cares about the quote big stuff that benefits himself is that something that you would have said at the time i don't
6:41 pm
think i would have said that i would have i would have honestly said that he was not a big fan of ukraine and he wants the investigations that we have been talking about for quite some time to move forward that's what i would have said because that's the fact mr holmes also remembers that you told him in giving an example of the big stuff the biden investigation that rudy giuliani was pushing do you recall that i don't i recall very smug not by and but do you recall saying in at least referee referring to an investigation that rudy giuliani was pushing is that something that you likely would have said i would have yes. now even if you don't recall specifically mentioning the biden investigation to david holmes we know that it was certainly on president trump's mind because just the day before in his call with president selenski he mentions specifically
6:42 pm
the biden investigation and i want to show you that exhibit that eggs are from the call on july 25th. where president trump says the other thing there's a lot of talk about biden's son that biden stop the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it it sounds horrible to me president selenski then responds with a reference to the company that he's referring to and 2 witnesses yesterday said that when president selenski actually said the company he said by research. so you would agree that regardless of whether you knew about the connection to the bidens at the very least that you now know that that's what president trump wanted
6:43 pm
at the time through the investigation i now know it all of course and at this time you were aware of the president's desire along with rudy giuliani to do these investigations including the 2016 election interference investigation is that right that's correct and you said president trump and directed you to talk to you and the others to talk to rudy giuliani at the oval office on may 23rd all right if we wanted to get anything done with ukraine it was apparent to us we needed to talk to rudy right you understood that mr giuliani spoke for the president correct that's correct and in fact president trump also made that clear to president selenski in that same july 25th phone call he said mr giuliani is highly highly respected man he was the mayor of new york city a great mayor and i would like him to call you i will ask him to call you along
6:44 pm
with the attorney general rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy and after this president trump then mentions mr giuliani twice more in that call. now from mr giuliani by this point you understood that in order to get that white house meeting that you wanted president selenski to have and the president selenski desperately wanted to have that ukraine would have to initiate these 2 investigations is that right well they would have to announce that they were going to do it right because they because giuliani and president trump didn't actually tear if they did them right i never heard mr goldman. anyone say that the investigations had to start or had to be completed the only thing i heard from mr giuliani or otherwise was that they had to be announced in some form and that form kept changing announce publicly announce
6:45 pm
publicly and you of course recognize that there would be political benefits to a public announcement as opposed to a private confirmation right well the way it was expressed to me was that the ukrainians had a long history of committing to things privately and then never following through so president trump presumably again communicated through mr giuliani wanted the ukrainians on record publicly that they were going to do these investigations that's the reason that was given to me but you never heard anyone say that they really wanted them to do the investigations doesn't anyone here i don't way i didn't hear either way. now your july 26th call with the president was not the only time that you spoke to the president surrounding that ukraine trip was it i believe i spoke to him before his call and that's so that would be on july 25th the day before yeah i think i was flying to ukraine and i spoke with him if i recall correctly just before i got on the
6:46 pm
plane so that's 2 private telephone calls with president trump in the span of 2 days right correct you had direct access then to president trump correct i had occasional access when he chose to take my calls sometimes he would sometimes he wouldn't. well he certainly took your call twice as it related to ukraine on these 2 days as i write it. now the morning of july 25th you texted ambassador volker and we could bring up the next text exchange at 7 54 am and you said call a.s.a.p. ambassador volker did not respond to you for another hour and a half and he said hi gordon got your message had a great lunch with your mach and then passed your message to him he will see you tomorrow think everything in place volker though an hour before that in about a half an hour before the phone call had texted andre year mark
6:47 pm
a top aide for president selenski and he wrote good lunch thanks heard from white house assuming presidency convinces trump he will investigate get to the bottom of what happened in 2016 we will nail down date for a visit to washington good luck see you tomorrow and busters on them was this message that kurt volker passed to andre or mock the message you left for kurt volker on that voicemail that he referenced you know i don't remember mr goldman but a very well could have been you don't have any reason to think it wasn't right again i honestly honestly don't remember but seems logical to me and if ambassador volcker testified that he did get that message from you you have no reason to doubt that if he testified that he got that message from me then i would concur with that so is it fair to say that this message is what you receive from president trump in that phone call that morning again if he testified to that to refresh my own memory then yes likely i would have received that from president trump but the sequence
6:48 pm
certainly makes sense right yeah does you talk to president trump he told her vocal to call you you left a message for kurt volker kurt volker sent this text message to andre your mock to prepare president selenski and then you president trump had a phone call where. president selenski spoke very similar to what was in this text message right right and you would agree that the message in this that is expressed here is that president selenski needs to convince trump that he will do the investigations in order to nail down the date for a visit to washington d.c. is that correct as correct. now. i mean to move ahead in time to the end of august and early september when you came to believe i believe as you testified that it wasn't just the white house meeting that was contingent on the announcement of these investigations at the
6:49 pm
president wanted but security assistance as well you testified that in the absence of any credible explanation for the hold on security assistance you came to the conclusion that like the white house visit the aid was conditioned on the investigations that president trump wanted as i would you said in your opening statement it is so let me break this down with you by this time you and many top officials knew that that coveted white house meeting for president selenski was conditioned on these investigations right now and some of the investigations thank you. and that includes secretary pompei oh right many many people and secretary bumbo yes an acting chief of staff mulvaney and you testified that this was a quid pro quo is that right i did. and you at this point by the end of august had knew that the aid had been held up for at least 6 weeks is that correct i believe i
6:50 pm
found out through ambassador taylor that the it had been held up around july 18th is when i when i heard regionally and even though you searched for reasons you never given a credible explanation is that right that's right and no one you spoke to thought that the age should be held to your knowledge as a right i never heard anyone advocate for holding the aid and now by this point at the end of august it went public in the ukrainians know about it right i believe there was some press reports you know presuming or who knows but i think at that point it became sort of common knowledge that everything might be tied together and in fact president elect you brought it up at that september 1st meeting with vice president pence but you were out right i don't know if he brought it up specifically but asked where the aide was i think was more i think he sort of asked again very vague recollection because i don't have a readout of the of the bilateral meeting but one why don't i have my check
6:51 pm
essentially and you you understood the ukrainians received no credible explanation as i write i certainly didn't couldn't give them one so this kind of a 2 plus 2 equals 4 conclusion that you reached pretty much 0 only logical conclusion to you that given all of these factors that the aid was also a part of this quid pro quo. now i want to go back to that conversation that you had with vice president pence right before that meeting in warsaw and you indicated that you said to him you were concerned that the delay in the aid was tied to the issue investigations right. i don't know exactly what i said to him this was a briefing attended by many people and i was invited at the very last minute i wasn't scheduled to be there but i think i spoke up at some point late in the
6:52 pm
meeting and said it looks like everything is being held up until these statements get made and that's my you know personal belief. and vice president pence just nodded his head i guess i don't recall any exchange or where he asked me any questions i think it was sort of a duly noted well he didn't say gordon what are you talking about he did not he didn't say what investigations he did not now after this meeting you discuss this polish side you had with mr yarmuk where you relayed your belief that they needed to announce these investigations prior to the aid being released that right i said i didn't know exactly why but this could be a reason. and obviously you have been speaking with mr yarmuk for quite a while about a public announcement of these investigations right we had all been working on
6:53 pm
toward that end so you indicated to him that in addition to the white house meeting security aide was now also involved that i as i said i said it could have been involved yes now i want to show you another text exchange you had on september 1st where ambassador taylor says to you are we now saying that security assistance and white house meeting are conditioned on investigations and you respond call me ambassador taylor recalls that he did call you and you did have a conversation and in that conversation you told ambassador taylor that the announcement of these investigations by president selenski needed to be public and that. that announcement was condition and on that announcement would ultimately release the tape do you recall that conversation of the messenger taylor
6:54 pm
again my conversation with the master taylor my conversation with senator johnson were all my personal belief just based on as you put it 2 plus 2 equals 4 well in that in his testimony ambassador taylor says that you said that president trump had told you that he wanted president selenski to state publicly as of september 1st do you have any reason to doubt ambassador taylor's testimony which he said was based on his meticulous contemporaneous notes president trump never told me directly at the aid was conditioned on the meetings the only thing we got directly from giuliani was that the aris month and 2016 elections were conditioned on the white house meeting the aide was my own personal. you know guess based again on your analogy 2 plus 2 equals 4 so you didn't talk to president trump when
6:55 pm
ambassador taylor says that that's what you told him is that your testimony here my testimony as i never heard from president trump that aid was conditioned on an announcement of the elections so you never heard those specific words correct right but never heard those words and well let's move ahead because you have another conversation. in a little bit later that both tim morrison and ambassador taylor recount but in this september 1st conversation besar taylor also says that testified under oath that you said that president trump wanted selenski in a public box do you recall using that expression yeah goes back to my earlier comment that again coming from the giuliani source because we didn't discuss this specifically with president trump that they wanted whatever commitments ukraine made to be made publicly so that they would be on the record and be held more
6:56 pm
accountable whatever those commitments were you also testified earlier ambassador taylor rather testified that you told him that you had made a mistake in telling the ukrainians that only the white house meeting was condition on the announcement of the investigations and that in fact everything was including the security assistance do you know ever saying that when i referenced a mistake i what i recall was i thought that a statement made by the new ukrainian prosecutor that these investigations would be started up again or commence would be sufficient to satisfy mr giuliani slash president trump as i recall my mistake was someone came back through volcker or otherwise and said no it's not going to do if the prosecutor makes these statements the president wants to hear it from selenski directly that's the mistake i think i made do you have any reason to question about that or taylor's testimony based on
6:57 pm
his meticulous and careful contemporaneous notes i'm not going to question or not question i'm just telling you what i believe i i was was referring to let me fast forward to we can show you another text exchange which may help refresh your recollection. on september 8th you had a you sent a text to ambassador taylor and ambassador volker can you read what you wrote there guys multiple convos with selenski potest let's talk and so this was september 8th of 11 20 in the morning and ambassador taylor responds immediately now is fine with me and if we could go to the next exchange ambassador taylor then 15 minutes later says gordon and i just spoke or 20 minutes later rather i can brief you if you and gordon don't connect speaking to investors or volker then ambassador taylor an hour later says the nightmare is they give the interview and don't get the security assistance the russians love it and i quit you would agree that in this text
6:58 pm
message after you had spoken that earlier an hour earlier with ambassador taylor that he is linking the security assistance to this interview this public announcement by president selenski is that right absolutely and in fact ambassador taylor testified that you did have a conversation with him at that point and he did and that you told him that just as your text message indicates you did have a conversation with president trump prior to that text message does that help to refresh your recollection that you in fact spoke to president trump at that time again i don't recall president trump ever talking to me about any security assistance ever. what this tells me refreshing my memory is that by the 8th of september it was it was abundantly clear to everyone that there was a link. and that we were discussing the chicken and egg issue of should the ukrainians go out on
6:59 pm
a ledge and make the statement that president trump wanted them to make and then they still don't get their white house visit in their aid that would be really bad for our credibility i think that's what he was referring to so you do acknowledge you spoke to president trump as you indicated in that text right if i said i did i did and that after that conversation use we're still under the impression that the aid was contingent on these public announcements i did not get that from president trump but i wasn't under the impression that absolutely it was contained well you weren't dissuaded then right because you still thought that the aid was conditioned on the public announcement of the investigations after speaking to president trump by september 8th that was absolutely convinced it was and president trump did not dissuade you of that in the conversation that you acknowledge you had with him i don't ever recall because that would have changed my entire calculus a president trump a told me directly i'm not as i would i'm asking
7:00 pm
a bestseller i'm just saying you still believed that the security assistance was conditioned on the investigation after you spoke to president trump yes or no from a time frame standpoint yes now ambassador taylor also testified that and mr morrison both of them testified that you told them that president trump said there was no quid pro quo which you also included in that text message that you referred but then you went on and they had slight variations as to what you told them but then you said that. to ambassador taylor that president selenski himself not the prosecutor general needed to clear things up in public or there would be a stalemate and mr morrison recounted something similar you don't have any reason to doubt that both of their very similar recollections of the conversations they had with you do you ambassador sunline let me break that down mr goldman the text is.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on