You are right now and you were preparing for a long awaited phone call between President Trump and president selenski now colonel binman in advance of this phone call did you prepared talking points as you did for the able to 21st call yes i did. What were those talking points based upon they were so this is not in the Public Record and i cant comment too deeply but what is. The areas that weve consistently talked to talked about in public is cooperation on supporting his reform agenda. Anti corruption efforts and helping president zelinsky implement his plans to and russias war against ukraine in other words theyre based on official u. S. Policy correct and is there a process to determine official u. S. Policy yes that is my job is to coordinate u. S. Policy so throughout the preceding. Year that ive been on on staff i had undertaken enough or to make sure we had a cohesive core here and u. S. Policy and as you listen to the call did you observe whether President Trump was following the talking points based on the official Us Policy Council the the president could choose to. Use the talking points or not hes the president but they were not consistent with what i provided yes lets take a look at a couple of excerpts from this this call and right after president selenski thanked President Trump for the United States support in the area of defense President Trump asked president selenski for a favor and then raises this theory of ukrainian interference in the 2016 election he says in the highlighted portion i would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and ukraine knows a lot about it i would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with ukraine they say crowd strike i guess you have one of your wealthy people the server they say ukraine has it now colonel women was this statement based on the official talking points that you had prepared you know and was this statement related to the 2016 ukraine interference in the 2016 election part of the official us policy now it was not now at the time of this july 25th call colonel vim and were you aware of a theory that ukraine had interfered intervened or interfered in the 2016 u. S. Election i was are you aware of any credible evidence to support this theory i am not. Are you also aware that Vladimir Putin had promoted this theory of ukrainian interference in the 2016 election im well aware of that fact and ultimately which country did u. S. Intelligence services to term and to have interfered in the 2016 election is the consensus of the entire and Intelligence Community that the russians interfere in u. S. Elections in 2016 lets go to another excerpt from this call where President Trump asked president selenski to investigate his political opponent Vice President joe biden here President Trump says the other thing theres a lot of talk about bidens 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 he said again colonel then when was this included in your talking points it was not such a request to investigate a political opponent consistent with official u. S. Policy it is was not consistent with the policies i understand it now were you aware of any credible allegations or evidence to support this notion that Vice President biden did something wrong or against u. S. Policy with regard to ukraine im not miss williams are you familiar with any credible evidence to support this theory against Vice President biden no im not no miss williams prior to the july 25th call approximately how many calls between the president the president the United States and foreign leaders had you listen to i would say roughly a dozen had you ever heard a call like this. As i testified before i believe what i found and unusual or different about this call was the president s reference to specific investigations and that struck me as different than other calls i have listened to you testify that you thought it was political in nature what did why did you think that i thought that the references to specific individuals and investigations such as former Vice President biden and his son struck me as political nature given that the former Vice President is a political opponent of the president and so you thought that it could potentially be designed to assist President Trumps reelection effort i cant speak to what the president s motivation was in one and referencing it but i just noted that the reference to bite and sound and political to me. Kernel of him and you youve said in your deposition that it doesnt take a Rocket Scientist to see the political benefits of the president s demands for those of us who are not Rocket Scientists can you explain what you meant by that so my understanding is that that it was the connection to investigate into a political opponent was inappropriate improper. I made that connection as soon as the president brought up in. The bottom investigation clover and you testified that the president President Trumps request for a favor from president selenski would be considered as a demand to president selenski after this call did you ever hear from any ukrainians either in the United States or ukraine about any pressure that they felt to do these investigations that President Trump demanded. Not that i can recall did you have any discussions with officials at the embassy here Ukrainian Embassy here in washington d. C. Yes i did did you discuss at all the demand for investigations with them i did not did you discuss at all at any point their concerns about the hold on Security Assistance to the best of my recollection in the august timeframe the Korean Embassy started to become aware of the hold on sick Security Assistance and they were asking if i had any comment on that or if i could substantiate that and that was before it went became public is that right yes and what did you respond i believe i said that. I dont recall frankly i dont recall what i said by i believe it may have been something along the lines of im not aware of it you testified that one of your concerns about the request for investigations related to us domestic politics was that ukraine may lose bipartisan support why was that a concern of yours ukraine is in a war with you and with russia and the Security Systems that we provide ukraine is significant absent that Security Assistance and maybe even more importantly the signal of support for ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity that would likely encourage russia to pursue or to potentially escalate to pursue further aggression undermining further undermining ukrainian sovereignty European Security and u. S. Security so in other words ukraine is heavily dependent on United States support both diplomatically financially and also militarily correct. Kind of him and what languages do you speak i speak russian and ukrainian and a little bit of english. You do you would know what let you recall what language president selenski spoke on this july 25th phone call i know he made a valiant effort to speak english he had been practicing up his english. But he also spoke ukrainian i want to look at the 3rd excerpt from the july 25th call and chairmanship addressed this with you in his questioning and you see in the highlighted portion it says specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue is is that the portion of the call record that colonel binman you thought president selenski actually said by recent correct and you testified earlier that his use of his understanding that when President Trump mentioned the bidens that that referred to the company the research sounded to you like he was prepped or prepared for this call is that right that is correct. I want to go to the 2 of the next slide if we could which is actually a text message that neither of you is on but this is from Ambassador Kurt Volker to andre yarmuk and colonel women whose andre your mock under your mark is a Senior Advisor within the president ial administration to ukraine president ial administration hes a Senior Adviser to president s alinsky. Now this text message is less than a half hour before the call on july 25th and since neither of you are on it ill read it it says from from ambassador volker good lunch thanks heard from white house assuming president z. Convinces trump he will investigate quote get to the bottom of what happened unquote in 2016 we will nail down date for a visit to washington good luck see you tomorrow kirk now is this the sort of thing that youre referring to when you say that it sounded like president selenski was prepared for this call that this would be consistent yes. Turning to the 4th excerpt from the july 25th call where ukraines president selenski links the white house meeting to the investigations that President Trump requests president selenski says i also want to thank you for your invitation to visit the United States specifically washington d. C. On the other hand i also wanted to ensure you that we will be very serious about the case and well work on the investigation kind of him and when president selenski says on the other hand would you agree that hes acknowledging a linkage between the white house visit that he mentions in the 1st sentence and the investigations that he mentions in the 2nd sentence it could be taken that way from the. Seems like a reasonable conclusion and if that is the case that would be consistent with the text message that ambassador volcker sent to andre yarmuk right before the call is that right seemingly so now youve youve testified in your deposition that a white house visit an oval office visit is very important to president selenski why is that the show of support for president lynskey. Still a brand new president. Frankly a new new politician. On the ukrainian political scene. Looking to establish is a bona fide is as a as a regional and maybe even a world leader would want to have a meeting with the United States the most powerful country in the world and ukraines most significant benefactor in order to be able to implement his agenda it would provide him with some additional legitimacy at home yes so just to summarize in this july 25th call between the president s of the United States and ukraine President Trump demanded a favor of president selenski to conduct investigations of both of you acknowledge war for a President Trumps political interest not the National Interest and in return for his promise of a much desired white house meeting for president selenski going to limit is that an accurate summary of the excerpts that we just looked at yes miss williams yes colonel dimon you immediately reported this call to the n. S. C. Lawyers why did you do that so at this point i had already been tracking this initially what i would differ describe as alternative narrative false narrative and i was certainly aware of the fact that it was starting to reverberate gain traction the fact that it in the july 10th call and it up being pronounced by a public official official investors on lynn had me alerted to this and i was subsequent to that report i was invited to follow up with any can other concerns to mr eisenberg and were going to discuss that july 10th meeting in in a moment but when you say alternative false narratives are you referring to the 2 investigations that President Trump referenced in the call yes. Now at some point did you also discuss how the written summary of the call records should be handled with the n. S. C. Lawyers there was following the report there was a discussion in the legal shop on the best way to manage a transcript yes what did you understand they concluded my understanding is that this was viewed as a sensitive transcript and to avoid leaks and if i recall the term properly or something along the lines of preserve the integrity of the transcript it should be. Segregated to a small group of folks to preserve the integrity of the transcript what it what did that mean im not sure i mean it seems like a legal term none tourney but it was i didnt take it as anything it nefarious i just i understood that they wanted to keep it into a Smaller Group if there was real interest in preserving the integrity of the transcript dont you think they would have accepted your correction that by recent should have been included not necessarily the way these edits occur they go through like Everything Else a approval process i made my contribution it was cleared by mr morris and then when i returned it you know sometimes that doesnt happen there are already mistreated errors i think that in this case i didnt see it didnt when i 1st saw the transcript without the 2 substantive items that i had attempted to include i didnt see that as nefarious i just saw it as ok no big deal you know these might be meaningful but its not that big a deal he said to substantive issues what was the other one there was a reference and. Section. So you know on page 4 of the top paragraph let me find the right spot ok. Yes you can look into it ellipse there are videos. So i recall in the recordings recordings instead of an ellipse sees there should it what should have said and to what you heard that there are recordings correct did you ultimately learn where the call record was put. I understood that it was being segregated into a separate system separate secure system why why would it be put on a separate secure system this is definitely not unprecedented but i times are you if you want to limit access to a Smaller Group of folks you put it on the secure system to ensure that a Smaller Group of people with access to the Security System have it but cant you also limit the number of people who can access it on the regular system you can do that but to the best my recollection the decision was made frankly on the fly after my after the fact i can after i conveyed my concerns to mr eisenberg mr ellis came in and he had heard the entire conversation and. When it was mentioned that it was sensitive it was kind of on the fly decision to just segregate in this other system mr eisenberg and mr ellis so the n. S. C. Lawyers correct but it was your understanding that it was not a mistake to put it on the highly classified system is that right im not sure i understand was it was it intended to be put on the highly classified system by the lawyers or was it a mistake that it was put there i think it was intended to but again it was intended to prevent leaks and to limit access now you testified to both of you about the 1st call a little earlier and colonel binman you indicated that you did include in your talking points the idea of ukraine rooting out corruption but that President Trump did not mention corruption. I want to go to the white house readout from the able to any 1st call and at the im not going to read the whole thing but you see the highlighted portion where it says root out corruption yes so in the end this readout was false is that right thats thats maybe thats a bit of. Its not entirely accurate but im not sure if i would describe it as false it was consistent with u. S. Policy and these items are used as messaging tools also so a statement that goes out. In addition to the category. Reading out the meeting itself is also a messaging platform to indicate what is important with regard to u. S. Policy so it is a part of u. S. Official policy that ukraine should root out corruption even if President Trump did not mention it in the 21st april 21st phone calls that right certainly and he also did not mention it in the july 25th phone call is that right correct so even though it was included in his talking points for the able to 21st call and presumably even though you cant talk about it for the july 21st call it was not included in either is that right for there the april 21st call not mention it in either rather correct so when the president says now that he held up Security Assistance because he was concerned about rooting out corruption in ukraine that concern was not expressed in the 2 phone conversations that he had with president selenski earlier this year is that right correct now miss williams you testified that earlier that after those able to 21st call President Trump asked fice president pens to attend president selenski inauguration is that right thats correct and that. On may 13th you were just informed by the chief of staffs office that for Vice President pence should not will not be going as per request of the president so right thats what i was informed yes and you didnt know what had changed from april 21st to may 13th is that right now not in terms of that decision. Well colonel inman since you in particular a little bit more perhaps than miss williams was a broader portfo