Expected to get underway in about seven minutes. Test. Test. Test. Test. Test. Test. Test. Test. Captioning performed by vitac the committee will come to order. Without objection, the chair reserves the right to reassess the hearing at any time. The president ial oath of office requires the president of the United States to do two things. Faithfully execute his or her office and protect and defend the constitution. Oath of course cannot be honored if the president does not first defend the country. If our National Security is jeopardized, if our country is left undefended, the necessity to faithfully execute the office becomes moot. Where there is no country, there is no office to execute. And so the duty to defend the nation is foundational to the president s responsibilities. But what if this second responsibility to defend the constitution . What does that really mean . The founders were not speaking of course of a piece of parchment. Rather they were expressing the obligation of the president to defend the institutions of our democracy, to defend our system of checks and balances that the constitution enshrines, to defend the rule of law, a principle on which the idea of america was born that we are a nation of laws, not men. If we do not defend the nation, there is no constitution. But if we do not defend the constitution, there is no nation worth defending. Yesterday, we were presented with a most of the most graphic evidence yet that the president of the United States has betrayed his oath of office. Betrayed his oath to defend our National Security. And betrayed his oath to defend our constitution. For yesterday we were presented with a record of a call between the president of the United States and the president of ukraine in which the president , our president , sacrificed our National Security and our constitution for his personal political benefit. So, werstand how he did must first understand just how overwhelmingly depended ukraine is on the United States. Literally, financially militarily, financially, diplomatically and in every other way. And not just on the United States, but on the person of the president. Ukraine was invaded by its neighbor, by our common adversary, by Vladimir Putins russia. It remains occupied by Russian Irregular forces in a long simmering war. Ukraine desperately needs our help and for years we have given it. And on a bipartisan basis. Ago is until two months when it was held up inexplicably by President Trump. Context after a brief congratulatory call from President Trump to president zelinski on april 21, and after the president s personal emissary at Rudy Giuliani made it abundantly clear to ukrainian officials over several months that the president wanted dirt on his political opponents, it is in this context that the new president of ukraine would speak to donald trump over the phone on july 25. President s a linsky either to establish himself at home as a friend of the president of the most powerful nation on earth had at least two objectives. Get a meeting with the president and get more military help. And so what happened on that call . Zelinski begins by ingratiating himself and he tries to enlist the support of the president. He expresses interest in meeting with the president and says his country wants to acquire more weapons from us to defend itself. And what is the president s response . It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates. Weve been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what . I dont see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor i want from you though. And im going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I went you to make up dirt on my political opponent understand, lots of it. On this and on that. Im going to put you in touch with people, not just any people. Im going to put you in touch with attorney general bill barr. Hes got the whole weight of the american Law Enforcement behind him. And im going to put you in touch with rudy. Youre going to love him. Trust me. You know what im asking and so im only going to say this a few more times. In a few more ways. And by the way, dont call me again. I will call you when youve done what i asked. This is in character of what the president was trying to communicate. It would be funny if it wasnt such a graphic the trail of the president s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there is nothing the president says here that is in americas interest after all. It is instead the most consequential form of tragedy. Confront the us to remedy the founders provided for such a flagrant abuse of office, impeachment. Now this matter would not have come to the attention of our committee or the nations attention without the courage of a single person. The whistleblower. You know, director maguire more so than perhaps any other area of government since we deal with classified information, the Intelligence Committee is dependent on whistleblowers to reveal wrongdoing when it occurs. When the agencies do not selfreport. Because outside parties are not allowed to scrutinize your work and to guide us. Tothat system is allowed break down as it did here, if whistleblowers come to understand that they will not be two thingse of happen. Serious wrongdoing goes unreported or whistleblowers take matters into their own hands and divulge classified information to the press in violation of law. And placing our National Security at risk. This is why the whistleblower system is so vital to us. And why your handling of this urgent complaint is also so troubling. Today we can say for the First Time Since we have released this morning the whistleblower complaint that you have marked unclassified. That the substance of this call is a core issue although by no means the only issue raised by the whistleblowers complaint. Which was shared with the committee for the first time only late yesterday. Law, the whistleblower complaint which brought this gross misconduct light should have been presented to this Committee Weeks ago and by you, mr. Director, under the clear letter of the law. And yet it wasnt. Maguire, i was very pleased when you were named acting director. Not going to was remain i was grateful that a man of your superb mill terry background was chosen. A navy seal for 36 years and director of the National Counterterrorism center since december 2018. Your credentials are impressive. In the limited interactions we have had since you became director, you haveyour credenti. Struck me as a good and decent man. Which makes your actions over the last month all the more will during. Not to provide the complaint to this committee as required by law. Why you chose to seek a Second Opinion on whether shall really means shall under the statute. Why you chose to go to a Department Led by a man, bill barr, who himself is implicated in the complaint and believes that he exists to serve the interest of the president , not the office itself, mind you, or the public interest, but the interest of the person of donald trump. Why you chose to allow the subject of the complaint to play a role in deciding whether the congress would ever see the complaint. Silent whend intelligence professional under your care and protection was ridiculed by the president. Was accused of potentially betraying his or her country. When that whistleblower by their very act of coming forward has shown more dedication to country , more of an understanding of the president s oath of office this than the president himself. Look forward to your explanation. Ranking member nunez. I thank the gentleman. I want to correctly the democrats on the rollout of their latest Information Warfare operation against the president. And their extraordinary ability to once again enlist the Mainstream Media in their campaign. This operation began with media reports from the prime instigators of the russia collusion hoax. That a whistleblower is claiming President Trump made nefarious promise to a foreign leader. The released transcript of that call has already bound to central assertion. But that didnt matter. The democrats simply moved the goalpost and began claiming there doesnt need to be a quick pro quote for this conversation to serve as the basis for impeaching the president. Speaker pelosi went further when asked earlier if she would put brakes on impeachment if the transcript turned out to be benign. So there you go. If the whistleblower operation doesnt work out, the democrats and their media we have many candidates for impeachable offenses. That was her quote. So there you go. If the whistleblower operation doesnt work out, the democrats and their media assets can always drama Something Else. Information has come to light since the original false report of a promise being made . We have learned the following. The complaint relied on hearsay evidence provided by the whistleblower. The Inspector General did not know the contents of the phone call at issue. The Inspector General found the whistleblower displayed arguable political bias against trump. The department of justice investigated the complaint and determines no action was warranted. The ukrainian president denies being pressured by President Trump. Lisa pozenin, scandal ends up being nothing like what we were told the supposed scandal ends up being nothing like what we were told and leakers are ginning up a fake story with no regard to the monumental damage they are causing to our Public Institutions and to trust in government. And without acknowledging all the false stories they propagated in the past including countless allegations the Trump Campaign colluded with russia to hack the 2016 election. We are supposed to forget about all those stories. But believe this one. In short, what we have with this storyline is another steele dossier. I will note here that in the democrats mania to overturn the 2016 elections, everything they touch gets hopelessly politicized. With the russia hoax it was our intelligence agencies which were turned into a political weapon to a tax the president. Attacked the president. Today, the whistleblower process is the casualty. Until about a week ago the need to protect that process was a primary bipartisan concern of this committee. But if the democrats were really concerned with defending that process, they would have pursued this matter with a quiet, sober inquiry as we do for all whistleblowers. But that would have been useless for them. They dont want answers. They want a public spectacle and so weve been treated to an unending parade of press releases, press conferences and fake news stories. Whistleblower inquiries should not be held in public at all. As our Senate Counterparts obviously understand, theyre hearing with mr. Maguire is behind closed doors. But again, that only makes sense when your goal is to get information, not to create a media frenzy. The current hysteria has Something Else in common with russia hoax. Back then, they accused the Trump Campaign of colluding with russians when the democrats themselves were colluding with russians. And preparing the steele dossier. Today they accuse the president of pressuring ukrainians to take actions that would help himself or hurt his political opponents. And yet there are numerous examples of democrats doing the exact same thing. Joe biden bragged that he extorted the ukrainians into firing a prosecutor who happened to be investigating bidens own son. Three Democratic Senators wrote a letter pressuring the ukrainian general prosecutor to reopen the investigation. Into former Trump Campaign officials. Another democratic senator went ukraine and pressured the ukrainian president not to investigate corruption allegations involving joe bidens son. According to ukrainian officials, the Democratic National committee contractor alexandra to luba tried to get ukrainian officials to provide air to honor Trump Associates and tried to get the former ukrainian president to comment publicly on alleged ties to russia. Official was a source for the wife of Department Justice official bruce or as she worked on the antitrump operation conducted by fusion gps and funded by the democrats. And of course, democrats on this very committee negotiated with people who they thought were ukrainians in order to obtain nude pictures of trump. People can reasonably ask why the democrats are so determined to impeach this president. When in just a year they will have a chance. Fact, one democratic congressman, one of the first to call for trumps impeachment davis the answer when he said, im concerned that if we dont impeach the president he will get reelected. Winning elections is hard. And when you compete, you have no guarantee you will win. But the American People to have a say in this. And they made their voices heard in the last president ial election. The latest gambit by democrats to overturn the peoples mandate is unhinged and dangerous. Should end the entire dishonest grotesque spectacle and get to work to solving problems which is what every member of this committee was sent here to do. , theng by todays charade chances of that happening anytime soon our zero to none. I yield back. I think the gentleman. Director, would you rise for the oath and raise your right hand . Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony will give today shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god . Thank you. You may be seated. The record will reflect that the winners has been duly sworn. Witness has been duly sworn. Director maguire, would you agree that the whistleblower complaint alleges serious wrongdoing by the president of the United States . Mr. Chairman, the whistleblower i apologize, director. Let me recognize you for your Opening Statement and you may take as much time as you need. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Chairman schiff, ranking members , thank you. Ttee i would like to thank you for providing postponing this hearing for one week. Mr. Chairman, i have told you this on several occasions and i would like to say this publicly. I respect you, i respect this committee and i welcome and take seriously the committees oversight role. During my confirmation process to be the director of the National Counterterrorism center, i told the Senate Select committee on intelligence that congressional oversight of the intelligence activities is critical and essential to successful operations with the Intelligence Community. Ofing served as the director the National Counterterrorism center for eight months and as the acting director of National Intelligence for the past six weeks, i continue to believe strongly that the role of congressional oversight. As i pledged to the senate, i pledge to you today that i will continue to work closely with congress while im serving either in this capacity as acting director of National Counterterrorism and when i returned to the National Counterterrorism center. To ensure you are fully and currently informed of intelligence activities to facilitate your ability to perform your oversight of the Intelligence Community. The American People expect us to keep them safe. The Intelligence Community cannot do that without this committees support. Before i turned to the matter at hand, there are a few things i would like to say. I am not partisan and i am not political. I believe in a life of service and i am honored to be a public servant. I served under eight president s while i was in uniform. I have taken the oath to the constitution 11 times. The first time when i was sworn into the United States navy in 1974 and nine times during my subsequent promotions in the United States navy. Former director dan coats administered the oath of office last december when i became the director of the National Counterterrorism center. I agree with you. The oath is sacred. Its the foundation of our constitution. The oath to me means not only that i swear true faith and allegiance to that sacred document, but more importantly i view it as a covenant i have with my work force that i lead and every american that i will well and faithfully discharge the duties of my office. I come from a long line of Public Servants who have stepped forward even in the most difficult times and austere times to support and defend our country. When i took my uniform off in july of 2010, it was the first time in 70 years that an immediate member of my family was not wearing the cloth of the nation. As a Naval