Joe biden, come on over to ukraine its never going to happen spewing all they had to do apparently was announce an investigation. Okay, that is it for us. They hearing is set to resume shortly, but now we have special report up next. Spewing that evening, welcome to washington. I am bret baier. Continuing coverage of the impeachment hearings day 3, nine hours on capitol hill as you look alive at the chairman adam schiff getting ready to gavel into the next round of questions this from the lawmakers themselves, while we wait, we will bring in our panel here. Byron york, chief Political Correspondent of the national and josh holmes, former top advisor to mitch mcconnell, now president of the Cavalry Consultants as you look there at tom morrison, tim morris and heading back in for testimony, and kurt volker right behind him. Quickly down the row, your thoughts on today so far . Today is the day that we
found out there was a difference of opinion about this trumpzelensky call, some officials like Colonel Vindman listened and were very alarmed and thought it was improper, but others like to morrison who is vindmans boss listen to it and were not alarmed. Do not think any improper thing had happened. The interesting thing about today is this is the first time we have heard from the latter part, because satirical witnesses this morning, vindman and Jennifer Williams were democratic witnesses as have all of the witnesses been so far. But the ones testifying now, tim morrison and kurt volker are republican witnesses. Bret any thoughts . We had a new poll come out today from marist, and it shows that really not much has changed despite the fact that we have had a number of televised hearings on day 3, i dont know that this will make much difference either. Bret adam schiff now beginning this hearing, lets listen in. Mr. Goldman, you are
recognized for 15 minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Ambassador volker. I want to correct the record from the first round. You were right to point out that you asked if the quote that i represented you made in the deposition was your words, and i actually read the wrong part of the quota. What you actually said was it creates a problem again where all of the things we are trying to do to advance a bilateral relationship, strengthen our support for ukraine, strength and the positioning against russia is now getting sucked into a domestic, political debate in the u. S. Domestic political narrative that overshadows that. So you were right to point that out. I apologize for the mistake. I want to go back to a couple of things that you said during the minority round, can you repeat again with the readout that you got of the July 25th Call . Yes, i received a readout from both ukrainian colleague
yermak as well as a u. S. Person, i do not remember whether it was my staffer or somebody from the embassy or where. But the readout was that it was a good phone call, that it was a congratulatory phone call for the president s win in the election. Their president zelensky did reiterate his commitment to Fighting Corruption and advancing reform in the ukraine. And that President Trump renewed his information and invitation to zelensky to come to the white house. You said that that readout was exactly as you expected the call to go . Exactly. Thats what we are trying to tee up. I want to show you again the July 25th Text that you wrote to andriy yermak, which was a message that you were relaying to him so that he could prepare president zelensky. And you recall this, right . Where you said this was the message, good lunch, thanks. Heard from white house, assuming
president z will investigate. Get to the bottom of what happened in 2016. We will nail down date for a visit to washington. Thats what you expected from the call, right . I expected that president zelensky would be convincing in his statements and comments with President Trump. That he was exactly that. That he would investigate and get to the bottom of things that it happened in 2016. And that if he was strong in conveying who he is as a person and doing that, President Trump would be convinced and renew the invitation to the white house. Right, but you do not mention corruption in this text, do you . This is the word corruption is not in this text . The corruption is not there, investigating things that happen in the past that were corrupt would be investigating corruption. You just said again that investigating things that happen in the past, you are aware of course that most investigations relate to things that happen in
the past, right . Yes. So that does not really move the needle whether it is current or past in terms of the subject of the investigation, right . Yes, the investigation of things that happened in the past. You talked about the meeting that you had on july 26 with president zelensky and ambassador sondland inc. Ef, is that correct . On the 26th . I had a meeting with president zelensky, yes. And i believe you testified that the topic of investigation did not come up at all, is that correct . I do not recall them coming up, just the general phone call. You do not take notes of that phone call . No, i did not. You had other staffers to do that, right . Correct. There were two staffers that testified that the subject of either sensitive topics came up, are we that are off taking their word for then years . I have no reason to doubt
their notes if they were taken contemporaneously at the meeti meeting . Meeting. Another witness to testify before us laura cooper about a meeting that she had with you on august 20th. Do you recall having that meeting with her . Because he did not relay any or deposition . I did mention that i had been making the rounds to weigh in on lifting the hold on Security Assistance to do that with all of the inner agency players. And she recalled with some specificity that meeting, which i believe was also based on her notes that you described the statement that you were trying to get president zelensky to make and i will quote what she said Disavow Interference in u. S. Elections and commit to the prosecution of individuals involved in election interference. And if you were agreed to do that, she testified you thought that it might help to lift the
hold on Security Assistance. Is that your recollection of the conversation as well . Not exactly. How does yours differ . I recall talking about the statement we discussed earlier, the one that was the subject of these exchanges between mr. Yermak and myself. Myself and ambassador sondland and Rudy Giuliani, and then back to yermak. This was an effort that we were doing that it could be helpful in getting a reset of the thinking of the president and the negative view of ukraine that he had. And if we did that, i thought that there would also be helpful in unblocking whatever hold their was on Security Assistance. That if there is this negative perception about ukraine getting the stuff on track would be helpful. So that is a different interpretation, but you dont doubt that what she testified is inaccurate, do you . I believe that she accurately reflected what she understood from the conversation. You testified a little bit
about the june 28th Conference Call that you had with investor sondland, Ambassador Taylor, im not sure if deputy kent was on the line and Secretary Perry before he looped in president zelensky, am i right about the participants . Was Secretary Perry not on it . Im pretty sure that Deputy Assistant deputy kent was not on it. I dont remember whether Secretary Perry was on it. And i dont remember whether i stayed on for a president zelensky joining the call or not. There were two separate calls. Are there any Staff Members are no takers on the call . I dont believe so. Why . We were having a call among ourselves to talk about what were the messages we felt we needed to convey. At that point we have had other testimony from people who did take notes that there was a discussion about the investigations or what you needed to do, what president zelensky needed to do in order to get the white house meeting,
do you recall that . I recall seeing that and Ambassador Taylors testimony. I believe that it couldve been a text message to that effect. And again, it comes down to what are we talking about in terms of these investigations. Because what i certainly understood as we are talking about ukraine looking into and Fighting Corruption internally and being convincing about this as presenting the new president and the new team as a change in ukraine. You understood that the investigations were burisma and the 2016 election, correct . Yes. You interpreted those to be okay because in theory they were looking into ukrainians . Correct. But we can agree, can we not, that the investigations, all of the investigations we are talking about here today were burisma and the 2016 election . Correct. What you then amended your testimony again today to say in retrospect, if you do not realize that the purpose for
mr. Giuliani and President Trump to want to the Burisma Investigation was to further political benefits and digging up dirt or getting some information on Vice President biden. Thats what you learned subsequently, right . It is correct that i learned about the president s interest in investigating Vice President biden from the Phone Call Transcript gained much, much later. From giuliani i did not know that he was actively pursuing this. I did know that he raise this with me directly and i push back on it. Well, you knew that ambassador sondland was pursuing this at the July 10th Meeting when he raise the investigations himself prior again, he did not specify biden, he did not specify burisma as i recall either. I understand it as a generic comment, and something not appropriate for that meeting. I understand, but biden was not mention, but you do agree when investigations are referenced in this context, it
is burisma in the 2016 election, no . Yes, thats what i understand i understand. And on that july 10th phone call when ambassador sondland raise the investigations, he did that in response to a question from the ukrainians about the white house meeting, isnt that correct . Can you repeat the question . I did not get that. You say that ambassador sondland was talking about meetings at that office. Nu said that you thought there was an appropriate . Yes. Dinner to make that comment in response to a question from the ukrainian officials about when they could schedule the white house meeting . That im not sure about. I remember the meeting essentially already being over and ambassador sondland bringing that up. In the july 2nd or 3rd meeting in toronto that you had with president zelensky, you also mention investigations to him, right . And again, you were referring to burisma i was thinking of burisma in 2016. You understood that thats what the ukrainians interpreted investigations to be about to burisma and the 2016 election . I dont know specifically at that time if we had talked that specifically, burisma and 2016, that was my assumption that they would be thinking that too. Now, mr. Morrison, when did you have that conversation with fiona hill about burisma and the parallel track, Parallel Process, rather involving ambassador sondland and giuliani, do you recall . A number of Handoff Discussions between one july and 15 july. So in that period of time, you were certainly aware of this effort to promote to this Burisma Investigation that ambassador sondland and Rudy Giuliani were going about . At least you had heard about it from dr. Hill . I heard about it from
dr. Hill. I want to pull up another excerpt from a recent Wall Street Journal article that quotes an email from Jul July 13th that ambassador sondland wrote to you. He wrote to you sole purpose is for zelensky to give potus assurances of new sheriff in town. Corruption ending, unbundling moving forward and any hampered investigations will be allowed to move forward transparently. And you responded tracking. What did you understand ambassador sondland to mean when he wrote to you any hampered investigations will be allowed to move forward transparently . I dont know that i had any understanding. These are emails july 13 emails, i was not even in the seat yet. But i knew that among the Head Of State meetings we were attempting a schedule was one between the president and
president zelensky. Right, but it was before this that dr. Hill had told you about to burisma and ambassador sondland in particular his desire for this Parallel Process to investigate burisma, right . Yes. So you had that association when he received his email asking you about investigations, correct . Not necessarily. No . No. Why not . Because among the discussions that i had with dr. Hill were about ambassador sondland, i think she mightve coined it the gordon problem. And i decided to keep track of what ambassador sondland was doing. I did not necessarily always act on things gordon suggested he believed were important. So he wanted to get a meeting, i understood that the president wanted to do u. N. Had agreed to
a meeting, so i was working and tracking that we needed to schedule a meeting. You are not endorsing the notion of president zelensky sending a message about investigations . Is that your testimony. That is my testimony. Ambassador volker, i want to jump ahead. After the aide was released, you went to the yes conference, right . In ukraine . Are you aware that bassett or taylor, who testified based on quite detailed notes indicated that earlier, a few days before that ambassador sondland had told him that President Trump is a businessman . And so before he writes a check, he likes to see people pay up, something to that effect . You are aware of that . Im unfamiliar with that
testimony. You are familiar that Ambassador Taylor said that you said something very similar to him when you were in ukraine for the gas conference, do you recall saying that . Yes, i do. I was repeating what Gordon Sondland had said to me to explain to bill taylor what that understanding was. And in what context did ambassador sondland say that to you . We were talking about the release of the hold on Security Assistance. And he was saying that the president , he already has a negative view on ukraine prayed he sees a check on his desk that is going to the ukrainians. Not sure about them, so he wants to hold on until he assured. In the pale before he writes the check is to get the investigations that he wants, right . That was not clear to me. What did you think it meant . I did not think that there was a pay up. The language was similar. I heard from gordon that he sees the check and is not sure, he
wants to make sure that he has a deal with the ukrainians. I did not know specifically other than the generic formation. I yield back. 15 minutes to Ranking Member nunes. Parliamentary inquiry of mr. Chair. Do you expect any more of these magical 15 minute moments in the back . I dont know how magical they are, they are produced by 660 that we can have successive rounds of up to 45 minutes. This is part of the prescribed procedure under the house resolution. Do you expect more this evening . I do not expect more will be necessary. Thank you, gentlemen. For everyone watching, this is another example of how out of control this process has become. Where the democrats just magically give themselves additional minutes. Which they are right in the special rule that they wrote,
they can do. But you at least think that they would have the decency to just listed that you will have 15 minutes more, and i would say that you can go for hours, we can go five hours, we will give you all you want. You can keep digging if you want. The deeper the hole you dig, more viewers will turn off, people are not buying a drug deal that you guys are trying to sell. I would add that since we are in prime time, these are two witnesses that were your witnesses that you called into the post. We still ask for witnesses that you did not depose including whistleblower who you and others claim not to know, which we still need to get to the bottom of that, because it is the most important material fact witness to how this whole mess began in the first place. Secondly we have asked for the dnc operatives that were working
with the ukrainians to dig up dirt for which you call, or what the left calls Conspiracy Theories. Which they are right, they are Conspiracy Theories and dirt that they dug up to spend their own Conspiracy Theories to attack the Trump Campaign in the 2016 election. So i have no more questions for these witnesses. I know our members do. Mr. Castor, you have a little bit of cleanup there. Thank you mr. Nunes, i will try to be quick and yield some time back so we dont have to use every last minute. Senator volker, your are you aware of the statement from mr. Petrenko that he said no one told the ukrainians, certainly not him that there was any linkage between the Security Assistance funds and investigations . I saw that statement, yes. Do you know the Foreign