Zelensky. Colonel vindman in advance of this phone call did you prepare talking points as did you for the april 21st call . Yes, i did. What were those talking points based upon. This is not in the Public Record and i cant comment too deeply. In areas that we talked about in public was cooperation on supporting reform agenda. Anticorruption efforts and helping president zelensky implement his plans to end 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 i had been on staff, i had undertaken an effort to make sure we had a cohesive, coherent and just policy. As you listened to the call, did you observe whether President Trump was following the talking points based on the official u. S. Policy . Counsel, 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 call. And right after president zelensky thanked President Trump for the United States support in the area of defense, President Trump asks president zelensky for a favor. And then raises this theory of ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. He says in the highlighted portion, i would like to you 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 vindman was this statement based on the official talking points that you had prepared . No. And was this statement related to the 2016 ukraine interference in the 2016 election part of the official u. S. Policy . No, it was not. Now at the time of this july 25th call, colonel vindman were you aware of a theory that ukraine had 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 . I am well aware of that fact . And ultimately, which country did u. S. Intelligence services determine to have interfered in the 2016 election . It is the consensus of the entire Intelligence Community that the russians interfered in the u. S. Elections in 2016. Lets go to another excerpt from this call where President Trump asked president zelensky 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 stopped the prosecution. And a lot of people want to find out about that. So whatever can you do w the attorney general would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. It sounds horrible to me, he said. Again, colonel vindman 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 was not consistent with the policies as i understood it. Are 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 . I am not. Ms. Williams, are you familiar with any credible evidence to support this theory of against Vice President biden . No. Im not. Now ms. Williams, prior to the july 25th call, approximately how many calls between president , president of the United States and foreign leaders had you listened to . I would say roughly a dozen. Had you ever heard a call like this . As i testified before, i believe what i found unusual or different about this call was the president s reference to specific investigations. And that struck me as different than other calls i had listened to. You testified you thought it was political in nature. Why did you think that . I thought the references to specific individuals and investigations such as former Vice President biden and his son struck me as political in 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 referencing it. But i just noted that the reference to biden sounded political to me. Colonel vindman, you said in your deposition, that it doesnt take a Rocket Scientist so 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 . My understanding is that it was, the connection to vekting a political opponent was inappropriate and improper. I made that connection as soon as the president brought up the biden investigation. Colonel vindman, testified that President Trumps request for a favor from president zelensky would be considered as a demand. To president zelensky. 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, the 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 Ukrainian Embassy started to become aware of the hold on Security Assistance and they were asking if i had any comment on that or if i could substantiate that. That was before it became public, is that right . Yes. What did you respond . I believe i said that i dont recall, frankly. I dont recall what i said. 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 u. S. Domestic politics with a that ukraine may lose bipartisan support. Why was that a concern of youres . Ukraine is in a war with russia. And the the Security Assistance 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 potentially escalate, to pursue further aggression. Fund undermining ukrainian sovereignty, European Security and u. S. Security. So in other words, ukraine is heavily dependant on United States support. Both diplomatically financially and also militarily . Correct. Colonel vindman, what language does you speak . I speak russian and ukrainian, and a little bit of english. Do you know what, do you recall what language president zelensky spoke on this july 25 phone call . I know he made a valiant effort to speak english. He had practicing up his english. But he also spoke ukrainian. I want to look at the third excerpt of the july 25th call. And chairman schiff addressed this with you in his questioning. You see in the highlighted portion, it says specifically to the company that you mentioned, in this issue, is that the portion of the call record that colonel vindman, you thought president zelensky actually said burisma . Correct. And you testified earlier that his use understanding that when President Trump mentioned the bidens, that that referred to the company burisma, sounded to you like he was prepped or prepared tore this call, is that right . Thats correct. I want to go to 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 yermac. And who is andre yermak in. A Senior Adviser within the ukrainian president ial zlings, a Senior Adviser to president zelensky. This text message is less than a half hour before the call on july 25th. It says 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 visit to washington. Good luck. See you tomorrow. Kurt. Is this the sort of thing that youre referring to when you say it sounded like president zelensky was prepared for this call . This would be consistent, yes. Now turning to the fourth excerpt from the july 25th call, where ukraines president zelensky links the white house meeting to the investigations that President Trump requests. President zelensky says i also wanted to thank you for your invitation to visit the United States. Specifically washington, d. C. On the other hand, i also wanted to insure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation. Colonel vindman, when president zelensky says on the other hand would you agree hes acknowledging a lingage between the white house visit he mentions in the first sentence and the investigations he mentions in the second sentence . It could be taken that way. Im not sure if i it seems like a reasonable conclusion. And if that is the case, that would be consistent with the text message that vabs volker send to andre yermak right before the call, is that right . Seemingly so. Now youve testified in your deposition that a white house visit, an oval office visit is very important to president zelensky. Why is that . The show of support for president zelensky, still a brand new president , a new politician on the ukrainian political scene, looking to establish his bona fides as a regional or 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 been factor. In order to be able to implement his agenda. They would provide him with some additional legitimacy at home . Yes. Just to summarize in this july 25 call between the president s of the United States and ukraine, President Trump demanded a favor of president zelensky. To conduct investigations that both of you acknowledge were for President Trumps political interest, not the national interest. And in return for his promise of a much desired white house meeting for president zelensky. Colonel vindman, is that an accurate summary of the excerpts we just looked at . Yes. Ms. Williams . Yes. Colonel vindman, you immediately reported this call to the nsc lawyers. Why did you do that . At this point i had already been tracking this initially what i would 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 10 call, ended up being pronounced by a public official, ambassador sondland, had me alerted to this. And i was subsequent to that report, i was invited to follow up with any other concerns to mr. Isenberg. And were going to discuss that july 10 meeting in a moment. When you say alternative false narratives, are you referring to the two 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 nsc lawyers . Following the report, there was a discussion in the legal shop on the best way to manage the transcript, yes. What did you understand they concluded . My understanding is that this was viewed as a sensitive transcript. And to avoid leaks, if i recall the term properly or something along the lines of preserve the integrity of the transcript. It should be segregated to a Smaller Group of folks. Preserve the integrity of the transcript . What did that mean . It seems like a legal term. Im not an attorney. I didnt take it as anything nefarious. I understood that they wanted to keep it in a Smaller Group. If there was real in preserving the integrity of the transcript, dont you think they would have accepted your contribution that burisma should have been included . Not necessarily. The way these edits occur, they, they go through like everything else, an approval process. I made my contribution, it was cleared by mr. Morrison. Then when i returned it, you know, sometimes that doesnt happen. There are administrative errors. I think in this case i didnt see, when i first saw the transcript without the two substantive items i had attempted to include, i didnt see it as nefarious, i just saw it as these might be meaningful, but its not a big deal. You said two substantive issues. What was the other one . There was a reference in a section on page 4, the top paragraph. Let me find the right spot. Okay. Yes, you could look into it, elipse, there are videos. Recordings. Instead of an elipses, it should have said to what you heard, that there are record sngs. Correct. Did you ultimately learn where the call record was put . I understood it was being segregated into a separate system. Separate secure system. Why would it be put on a separate secure system . This is definitely not unprecedented. But at times you, if you want to limit access to a Smaller Group of folks you put it on the secure system. To insure that a Smaller Group of people with access to the secure system have it. Cant you also limit the number of people who can access it on the regular system . You can do that. But to the best of my recollection the decision was made frankly on the fly. After my, after the fact i could, after i conveyed my concerns to mr. Isenberg. Mr. Ellis came in. He hadnt heard the entire conversation and when it was mentioned that it was sensitive, it was an onthefly decision to segregate it in this other system. Mr. Isenberg and mr. Ellis are the nsc lawyers . Correct. It was your understanding it was not a mistake to put it on the highly classified system, is that right . Im not sure i understand. 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. But it was intended to prevent leaks and to limit access. You testified, both of you, about the april 21 call a little earlier. And colonel vindman, 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 april 21st call. And at the, im not going to read the whole thing. You see the highlighted portion where it says root out corruption . Yes. In the end this readout was false, is that right . Maybe thats a bit of a 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. A statement that goes out, in addition to reading out the meeting itself. Is also a messaging platform to indicate what is important with regards to u. S. Policy. It is a part of u. S. Official policy that ukraine should root out corruption even if President Trump did not mention it in that april 21 phone call, is that right . Certainly. He also did not mention it in the july 25 phone call, is that right . Correct. So even though it was included in his talking points for the april 21 call and presumably you cant talk about it for the july 21 call. It was not included in either, is that right . For the april 21 call he didnt mention it in either, rather . Correct. 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 two phone conversations that he had with president zelensky earlier this year, is that right . Correct. Now ms. Williams, you testified that earlier, that after this april 21 call, President Trump asked Vice President pence to attend president zelenskys inauguration, is that right . Thats correct. And that on may 13, you were just informed by the chief of staffs office that Vice President pence should not, will not be going, per request of the president , is that right . Thats what i was informed, yes. And you didnt know what had changed from april 21 to may 13, is that right . No, not in terms of that decision. Well colonel vindman, since you in particular are a little bit more perhaps than ms. Williams who has a broader portfolio, focuses on ukraine. I want to ask you if youre aware of the following things that happened from april 21 to may 13. Were you aware that ambassador yovanovitch was abruptly recalled from ukraine in that time . Yes. Were you aware that President Trump im sorry to correct it. She was recalled prior, let me see she, the notification occurred towards the end of april and she was finally recalled in the may timeframe, may 25 if i recall correctly. She learned about it after april 21, on april 24, is that right . Correct. Were you aware that President Trump had a telephone