Committee will come to order. Without objection, the chair reserves the right to recess 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. That oath 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 the second responsibility to defend the constitution, what does that really mean . The founders were not speaking, of course, of a piece of parchment, they were speaking of the president 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 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. To understand how he did so, we must understand how overwhelming dependent ukraine is on the United States, 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 Forces in a long, simmering war. Ukraine needs our help and for years we have given it and on a bipartisan basis. That is until two months ago when it was held up by President Trump. It is in this context, after a brief call from President Trump to president zelensky on april 21st, and after the president s personal emissary Rudy Giuliani made it clear to ukrainian officials that the president wanted dirt on his political opponent, it is in this context that the new president of ukraine would speak to donald trump over the phone on july 25th. President zelensky eager 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 . Zelensky begins by ingratiating himself and he tries to enlist the support of the president. He says his country wants to acquire more weapons from us to defend itself. And what is the president s response . Well, it reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. 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 want 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 the attorney general of the United States 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, ill call you when youve done what youve asked. This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of ukraine. It would be funny if it wasnt such a graphic betrayal of the president s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, theres nothing the president says here that is in americas interest after all. It is the most consequential form of tragedy. 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. As you know, director maguire, 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. If that system is allowed to break down, as it did here, if whistleblowers come to understand that they will not be protected, one of two things happen, serious wrongdoing goes unreported or whistleblower take matters into their own hands and divulge classified information to the press in violation of the 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. By law, the whistleblower complaint which brought this gross misconduct to 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. Director maguire, i was very pleased when you were named acting director. If sue gordon was not going to remain, i was glad that you were chosen, a navy s. E. A. L. For 36 years and director of the National Terrorism center since 2018. Your credentials are impressive. You have struck me as a good and decent man which makes your actions over the last month all the more bewildering. Why you chose 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. Why you chose to go to a department and believes hes to serve the president. Why you chose to allow the subject of the complaint to play a role in deciding whether congress would ever see the complaint. Why you stood silent when intelligence professional under your care and protection was ridiculed by the president , was accused of betraying his or her country. When the whistleblower by the very act of coming forward as shown more dedication to country, more of an understanding of the president s oath of office than the president himself. We look forward to your explanation. Ranking member nunez. I thank the gentleman. I want to congratulate the democrats on the rollout of their latest Information Warfare operation and their extraordinary ability to once again list the Mainstream Media in their campaign. This operation began with media reports from the prime instigators of the russian collusion hoax. That a whistleblower is claiming that President Trump made promises to a foreign leader. That central assertion has already been debunked. The democrats moved the goalpost and began claiming there sunt need to be a quid pro quo for this conversation to serve as the basis for impeaching the president. Speaker pelosi went further when asked earlier if she would put brake on the impeachment if the transcript turned out to be benign. She responded, there you go, if the whistleblower operation doesnt work out, the we have candidates quote, 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 drum up Something Else. And what has also come to light, 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 biassed against trump. The department of justice investigated the complaint and determined no action was warranted. The ukrainian president denies being pressured by President Trump. So, once again, the supposed scandal ends up being nothing like we are told and once again the democrats and leakers are ginning up a fake story with no regard for the damage theyre causing to our Public Institutions and to rest in government. And without acknowledging all the false stories they propagated in the past, including countless allegations that the Trump Campaign colluded with russia to hack the 2016 election. Were supposed to forget about all those stories, but believe this one, in short, what we have with this story line is another steel dossier. In the democrats mania to aver turn the 2016 elections, everything they touch gets hopelessly politicized, with the russia hoax, it was our intelligence agencies and now today the whistleblower process is the causality. Until about a week ago, the need to protect that process was the 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 a parade of press releases, press conferences and fake news stories. This hearing itself is another example, whistleblower inquiries should not be held in public at all. Their 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 the russia hoax. Back then they accused the Trump Campaign of colluding with russians when the democrats themselves were colluding with russians and preparing the steel dossier. Today, they accused the president of pressuring ukrainians to take actions that would help himself or hurt his political opponents. 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 prosecutor to reopen the investigation into former Trump Campaign officials. Another democratic senator went to ukraine and pressured the ukrainian president not to investigate corruption allegations on involving joe bidens son. According to ukrainian officials, the Democratic National committee, contractor tried to get ukrainian officials to provide dirt on Trump Associates and tried to get the former ukrainian president to comment publicly on alleged ties to russia. Ukrainian official was a source for nellie orr as she worked on the antitrump operation conducted by fusion gps and funded by the democrats. 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, theyll have a chance. In fact, one democratic congressman, one of the first to call for trumps impeachment, gave us the answer when he said, quote, im concerned that if we dont impeach the president , he will get reelected, unquote. Winning elections is hard and when you compete, you have no guarantee youll win. But the American People do have a say in this and they made their voices heard in the last president ial election. This latest by the democrats is unhinged and dangerous. They should end the entire, dishonest, grotesque spectacle and get back to work on solving problems. Judging by todays charade, the chances of that happening any time soon are zero to none. I yield back. I thank the gentleman. Director, would you rise for the oath and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you 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 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 actually, i apologize, director, let he 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 Member nunez and members of the committee, good morning. Id like to begin by thanking the chairman and the committee for agreeing to postpone this hearing for one week. This provided sufficient time to allow the executive branch to successfully complete its consultations regarding how to accommodate the committees request. Mr. Chairman, ive 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, i told the Senate Select committee of intelligence that congressional oversight of Intelligence Community is critical. Having served as the director 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 pledge to the senate, i pledge to you today, that i will continue to work closely with congress while im serving hereto in this capacity as acting director or when i return to the National Counter terrorism 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 committee support. Before i turn to the matter of 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. Most recently, former director dan coats administered the oath of office last december when i became the director to have the National Counter terrorism center. I agree with you, the oath is sacred. Its a foundation of our constitution. The oath to me means not only that i swear faith to that sacred document, but i view it as a covenant i have with my workforce that i lead and every american that i will discharge the duties of my office. I come from a long line of Public Servants who have stepped form during the most difficult 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 wasnt wearing the cloth of the nation. I had the honor of commanding at every level in the s. E. A. L. Community. It was at times very commanding but the rewards of serving in americas special Operations Community more than make up for the demands. After my retirement, i was fortune to work for a great private sector firm. I left the Business World after three years to lead a nonprofit charity. Some question why i would leave a Promising Business career to run a charity. The answer was quite simple, it was another opportunity to serve. I led a foundation dedicated to honoring the sacrifice of our fallen operators. The foundation i led enabled hundreds of our children of the fallen to attend college. In the winter of 2018, i was asked by former director dan coats to return to Government Service to lead the National Counter terrorism center. This request was totally unexpected and was not a position i sought. But then again, it was another opportunity to serve my country. In particular, i knew that many of the young sailors and Junior Officers that i had trained were now senior combat veterans, deploying and still sacrificing. I decided if they could continue to serve, returning to Government Service was the very least i could do. And now, here i am, sitting before you as the acting director