That is correct. You explained earlier that your job in the white house was to coordinate United States and Ukraine Policy, is that right . It is to coordinate United States policy visavis ukraine, correct. You testified in the spring of this year that these officials, these ukrainian officials began asking you, quote, advice on how to respond to mr. Giulianis advances, end quote. Is that correct . That is correct. What do you understand they meant by mr. Giulianis advances . I understood that to mean both his public commentary, so publicly calling for investigations into 2016, burisma, and hunter biden, as well as his direct overtours to the government of ukraine directly and through proxies. Thats what i understood. As you understand it, under Whose Authority do you think mr. Giuliani was acting under . Congresswoman, i dont know. Did the ukrainian officials you were speaking to tell you that they were being asked to im sorry, can you say that again, maam . Do you think the ukrainian officials you spoke to understood the underlying meaning of mr. Giulianis advances to be investigating the bidens as well as be debunking the 2016 Conspiracy Theories . Yes, that it was ukrainian interference. Was this official u. S. Foreign policy to push for investigation into the bidens . It was not part of any process that i participated in. Ms. Williams, do you agree that pressing these two investigations was inconsistent
with official u. S. Ukraine Policy . Obviously anticorruption reforms is a big part of our policy. I understand, i was not in a position to determine whether or not these particular thats fair. Colonel, is it true that President Trump directed the ukrainian president on the call on july 25th to work with mr. Giuliani on these investigations . That is correct. In fact, mr. Giuliani has made no secret of the fact that hes acting on behalf of President Trump. As mr. Giuliani told the new york times, and im going to put this on the screen, he told them, quote, my only client is the president of the United States. Hes the one i have the obligation to report to, to tell him what happens. He added that the investigations would be, quote, very, very helpful to my client and may turn out to be helpful to my government, end quote. Colonel, is it fair to say the
ukrainian officials well, you are in contact with given your portfolio, were concerned about mr. A giulianis advances . Yes, they were. In your assessment, did they understand the political nature of the request being asked of them . I believe they did. Did they understand it was affecting u. S. Domestic policy . Im not sure what they, frankly, understood about and you i think they understood the implications, yes. You testified earlier that you warned the ukrainians not to get involved in u. S. Domestic policy, is that right . I counseled them, yes. Counseled them. In fact you testified that you felt like it was important that you were espousing not just what you thought but tradition and policy of the United States to say that . It is what i knew for a fact to be u. S. Policy. Now, why do you think its important for Foreign Governments not to get involved in Political Affairs of a nation like the United States . Congresswoman, the first thought that comes to mind is russian interference in 2016. The impact that had on internal politics, and the consequences it had for russia itself. Exactly. This administration enforced sanctions, heavy sanctions against russia for their interference. That would not be in the u. S. Policy colonel, im running out of time. I understand. Is it normal for a private citizen, a nonu. S. Government official, to get involved in Foreign Policy and Foreign Affairs like mr. Giuliani . I dont know if i have the experience to say that but it certainly Wasnt Helpful and didnt help advance u. S. National security interests. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. Mr. Turner. Ms. Williams, lot Colonel Vindman, i want to thank you also for your service, your knowledge and expertise is incredibly important as we look to Formulating Policy with our allies and to try to counter those who are not our allies. I think were all very concerned about our european policy and how it can thwart russian aggression. Ms. Williams, as you said, as part of your portfolio, you advised the Vice President about ukraine, correct . Correct. Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, in your opening you say you are the principal adviser to the president on ukraine and you coordinate u. S. Ukraine Policy, correct . Congressman, in this statement i issued this morning i probably eased that back, i took that off my Job Description that i have on my eval. But i certainly spent much more time advising the ambassador than i did the president. But your statement, as you submitted it and read it today, says at the nsc i am the principal adviser to the National Security adviser and
the president on ukraine, correct . That is not what i read into the transcript. That may have been what i had in there yesterday when i was drafting it. But i chose to ease back on that language even though it was in my evaluation, just because i didnt want to you wrote what i just read . Congressman, what im saying is what i read into the record this morning didnt say that. Okay. Noted. Because you know ukraine, you know that we work through our allies and our multilateral relations and you know that ukraine is an aspiring member of nato and the eu; is that correct . Correct. Correct. And you know that the eu and no nato both have offices in the ukraine. We try to advance our policies with nato and you both know Kay Bailey Hutchison and ambassador
sondland were responsible for advancing our interests in nato and the eu, is that right, ms. Williams . I would say certainly in terms of this specific relationship between nato and the ukraine, that would fall to ambassador hutchison and for ukraithe eu, ambassador sondland. Do you agree, Lieutenant Colonel vindman . I would agree. Thank you. Lieutenant colonel, you said in your Written Statement that mayor Rudolph Giuliani promoted false information. Have you ever met jugiuliani . I said false narrative, just to be record, thats what i said in the record this morning. I have not met him. So you never had a conversation with him on ukraine or been in a meeting where hes spoken to others about ukraine . No, just when i saw him, his comments on tv. So news reports. And in news, yes. Similarly, youve never met the president of the United States, right . That is correct. So youve never advised the president of the United States on ukraine . I advised him indirectly. I made all the preparations for his calls. Youve never spoken to the president and told him advice on ukraine . That is correct. So in your Written Statement you said in may i attended the inauguration of president zelensky as part of the president ial Delegation Led by secretary perry. You were a member but you werent in that meeting, were you . That is correct. Well just note there that that meeting occurred without you. Yet you do know that this Impeachment Inquiry is about the president of the United States, dont you . I do, representative. Excellent. Now, youve said that youre responsible for coordinating u. S. ukrainian policy. Correct. Does the secretary of state, pompeo, report to you . He does not. Ambassador volker . He does not. I coordinate ambassador to ukraine, anyone report to you in your responsibilities . Congress mman, at my level i convene the meetings with the deputy assistant. Does anybody need your approval to formulate Ukraine Policy . According to the nspm 4, the policy signed by the president so coordinated by the nsc, correct. Ms. Williams, do you have any information that any person who has testified as part of this Impeachment Inquiry, either in secret or in public, has either perjured themselves or lied to this committee . I have not read the other testimonies. And do you have any evidence, though . No, because i have not read them. Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, do you have any evidence that anyone who has testified before this committee in the Impeachment Committee has p
perjured themselves or lied to this committee . Not that im aware of. I yield bhaack. Mr. Carson. I yield to the chairman. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I wanted to make one point clear for folks that are watching the hearing today. Bribery does involve a quid pro quo. Bribery involves the conditioning of an official act for something of value. An official act may be a white house meeting. An official act may be 400 million in military aid. And something of value to a president might include investigations of their political rival. The reason we dont ask witnesses that are Fact Witnesses to make the judgment about whether a crime of bribery has been committed or whether, more significantly, what the founders had in mind when they itemize bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors, is your Fact Witnesses. It will be our job to decide whether the impeachable act of
bribery has occurred. Thats why we dont ask you those questions. For one thing, youre also not aware of all the other facts that have been adduced during the investigation. With that, i yield back to mr. Carson. Thank you, chairman. Thank you both for your service. Colonel vindman, you were in a july 10th white house meeting in ambassador boltons office, is that correct, sir . Im sorry, can you say that again . You were in a july 10th white house meeting with ambassador bolton . Correct. In that meeting the ukrainians asked about when they could get their oval office meeting, and ambassador sondland replied they need to, quote, speak about ukraine delivering specific investigations in order to secure a meeting with the president , end quote. Is that correct, sir . That is correct. Colonel vindman, did you later learn why ambassador bolton cut the meeting short . I did. After ambassador bolton ended that meeting, sir, some of the group that attended a followon meeting in a dinner room in the white house called the ward
room, is that correct, sir . That is correct. And ambassador sondland was there with the senior ukrainian officials; is that correct . That is correct. Did nsc lawyers tell you to come directly to them, sir, if you had any other concerns after july 10th . They said that i believe the words were something to the effect of, if you have any other concerns, feel free to come back. And this followon meeting, sir, ambassador sondland left, in your words, no ambiguity about what specific investigations he was requesting. Ambassador sondland made clear that he was requesting an investigation of Vice President joe bidens son; isnt that corre correct, sir . That is correct. And he stated he was asking these requests in coordination with white house Chief Of Staff mick mulvaney, correct, sir . Thats what i heard him say. Colonel, in your career, had you ever before witnessed an american official request that a Foreign Government investigate a u. S. Citizen who is related to
the president s political opponent . I have not. And colonel, you immediately raised concerns about this, correct, sir . That cis correct. What exactly happened . After i reported it to the im sorry. Oh, im sorry, cue sould you sa that again . I apologize. You raised concerns about this, correct, sir . Correct. What happened . To ambassador sondland i stated it was inappropriate and had nothing to do with National Security policy. Did you also Raise Concerns that day with white house lawyers . I did. What did you tell them . I reported the same thing, i reported the content of the conversation with ambassador sondland. At that point i wasnt aware that dr. Hill had had a conversation with ambassador bolton so i just relayed what i experienced to the attorney, lead Legal Counsel. As we are now aware, sir,
ambassador bolton expressed his concerns and instructed dr. Fiona hill, your supervisor, to also meet with the same white house lawyers to tell them what happened. Colonel vindman, i agree there is no question that ambassador sondland was proposing a transaction to ukrainian officials, trading white house meetings for specific investigations. The full awareness of the president s Chief Of Staff, white house attorneys, and his National Security adviser. In my view, sir, thats appalling. Thank you both for your service. I yaeield back to the chairman. I thank the chairman. I would point out as well that when the matter does move to the judiciary committee, and no decision has been made about the ultimate resolution, the white house through its counsel will have the opportunity to submit or make a submission to the judiciary committee. I now turn to dr. Wenstrop. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, thank you very much for being
here. As an army colonel who served in iraq, i thank you for your service and i know the environment. In your deposition you emphasize the importance of Chain Of Command. You were a Direct Report to dr. Hill and mr. Morrison and they were your seniors; is that correct . That is correct. When you had concerns about the 7 25 call, you didnt go to mr. Morrison about that, did you . I immediately went to john eisenberg, the Legal Counsel. That doesnt seem like Chain Of Command. Thats not in the deposition im sorry, can i answer the question . Congressman, please allow Colonel Vindman to answer. I reported to john eisenberg. I attempted to report it to mr. Morrison. Thank you. He didnt avail himself. At that point i was told not to he did avail himself. Please allow the witness to finish. Colonel, are you finished with your answer . Yes. Thank you. Okay. In the morrison deposition, on page 58 to 60, it question was do you know if anyone else on the call went to eisenberg to express concerns and your answer was, i learned based on open source reporting which i have no firsthand knowledge that other personnel did Raise Concerns. Question who . Based on open source, without firsthand knowledge, alex vindman on my staff. The question then, and he reports to you, correct . Answer he does. Lieutenant colonel vicinindman Direct Report was mr. Morrison and it didnt happen. Lieutenant colonel, the question was, okay, after the call on 7 25, do you have any discussions with mr. Morrison about your concerns . Answer after the call, i well per the exercise in the Chain Of Command and expressing i immediately went to the senior nsc Legal Counsel and shared those concerns. That would be mr. Eisenberg,
correct . Im sorry. My lawyer was talking. Could you say that again, please . You went to mr. Eisenberg, you already said that so we can go on. Youre not a jag, youre not a lawyer. In your deposition, you referenced that meeting with mr. Eisenberg. You said, i Wasnt Making A legal judgment, all i was doing was sharing my concerns with my Chain Of Command. Yet weve established that your Direct Report is to mr. Morrison. Lets establish your role and your title. In your deposition, Lieutenant Colonel vindman, page 200, 201, in a colloquy with mr. Stewart, you said, i would say first of all im the director for ukraine. Im responsible for ukraine. Im the most knowledgeable. And im therefore the National Security council and the white house. Are you the only one of the entire universe of our government or otherwise that can advise the president on ukraine . Couldnt someone like ms. Williams also advise on ukraine . Its in her portfolio. Thats not typically what would happen. Frankly it would be ambassador bolton other people can advise on ukraine besides you. Going on in your testimony, you said, i understand all the nuances, the context and so forth surrounding these issues. I on my judgment went, expressed concerns within the Chain Of Command which i think to me as a Military Officer is completely appropriate and i exercised that Chain Of Command. Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, you said, i forwarded my concerns through the Chain Of Command and the seniors then decide the action to take. Mr. Morrison is your senior. He didnt know about it. How can he decide an action to take . But thats what you said. In m