End of the fiscal year, we did and an analysis of what other countries were doing. And i cant remember if it was zero or near zero dollars from any European Countries for lethal aid. Youve heard the president say we give them tanks and other countries give them pillows. That is right. As vocal at the europeans are about supporting ukraine, they are really, really stingy when it coming to lethal aid. They werent helping ukraine and to this day are not. And the president did not like that. Long answer, but im still going. Those were the driving factors. Did he also mention to me that the corruption that related to the dnc server . Absolutely. No question. But that is it. And that is why we held up the money. So the demand for an investigation into the democrats was part of the reason that he ordered to withhold funding to ukraine . The look back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing that he was worried about in corruption with that nation. And that is appropriate. To withhold the funding. Which ultimately then flowed. By the way, there was a report that we were worried that the money wouldnt if we didnt pay out the money, it would be unlawful. That is one of those things that has a little shred of truth in it that makes it look a lot worse than it really is. We were concerned about at obm about an impoundment. And i just know i put half you folks to bed. But the Budget Control Impoundment Act of 1974 says if Congress Appropriates money, you have to spend it. And we knew that that money either had to go out the door by the end of september or we had to have a really good reason not do it. And that was the legality of the issue. Lets be clear. You described a quid proceed quoe company. It is funding will not flow unless the investigation into the democratic server happened as well. We do that all the time with Foreign Policy. We were holding up money at the same time for, what was it, the northern triangle countries. We were holding up aid to the
northern triangle countries so that they would change their policies on immigration. By the way, and this speaks to an important story . This speaks to an important point. I heard this yesterday and i can never remember the gentleman. Mckinney . I dont know. But he testified yesterday. And if you believe the news reports, because weve not seen any transcripts of this, the only transcript ive seen is sondlands testimony morning. What did mckinney said . He said that he was upset with the political influence in Foreign Policy. That was Wochbts Reasoone Of Re was upset. I have news for everybody. Get over it, there is political influence in Foreign Policy. Elections have consequences. Foreign policy will change from the Obama Administration to the Trump Administration. And what you are seeing now i believe is a group of mostly Career Bureaucrats who are saying that i dont like President Trumps politics, so im going to participate in this
witch hunt that they are undertaking on the hill. Elections do have consequences and they should and your Foreign Policy will change. Obama did it in one way, were doing it in a different way and no problem with that. Did that come into krlgs when that sorry, i dont know your name, but he is being very rude. Go ahead and ask your question. Just to clarify and follow up on that question, as to when you are saying politics is going to be involved, the question is not just about a political decisions about how you want to run the government. This is about investigating political opponents. Are you saying no, the dnc server that it is okay for the u. S. Government to hold up aid and require a Foreign Government to investigate political opponents of the president . You are talking about looking forward to the next election. Were talking about the dnc is still involved in this next election, is that not correct . So wait a second. So hold on. Let me is the dnc a political there is and on going investigation by our Department Of Justice into the 2016 election. I cant remember the persons name. Durham. Okay . That is an Ongoing Investigation. Right . So you are saying that the president of the United States, chief Law Enforcement person cannot ask somebody to cooperate with an ongoing public investigation into wrongdoing . That is just bizarre to me that you would think that you cant do that. And so you would say that it is fine to ask about the dnc but not about biden . So biden is now biden is running for the democratic nomination for 2020. So you are that is a hypothetical because that did not happen here. But i would ask you no, no, on the call, the president did ask about investigating the bidens. Are you saying that the money that was heltd held up the money held up had nothing to do with the bidens. That was the point i made to you. And you are drawing the distinction that again, i was involved with the process by which the money was held up temporarily. Okay . Three issues for that. The corruption in the country, whether or not other countries were participating in support of the ukraine, and whether or not they were cooperating in an Ongoing Investigation with our Department Of Justice. That is completely legitimate. Yes, sir. Regarding the secretary at the State Department, the deputies for the european Eurasia Affairs reportedly testified that you asked him to step down from any issues regarding ukraine. Is that true, do you who said that . George kent. Im sorry, i dont know who that is. Is that somebody who testified this week . Yes. I dont believe ive ever talked to anybody named George Kent In My Life nor have i asked anybody to resign their position over this. And another thing, there have been reports that you have been
conducting a review of the Phone Calling with Volodymyr Zelensky, the ukranian president. And the question is, what are you is that true, do you acknowledge that you have been conducting that review or was the call just perfect as the president said . Again, no one here had any difficulty with the call. There is no difficulty with the call at all. I read it several times. By the way, who was not on the call, someone in my office was on the call, nobody raised any difficulty on the call at all. I understand no one at call offered any difficulty with it. But to your point about what were doing inside. Was this an attempt to uncover the whistleblower . No. Here is what it is. Look, if you are having the house do what they are going to do, doesnt it simply make sense for us to try to find out what
happened . This is one of the questions that i dont understand from you folks that we get all the time, which is some of you have criticized us for having a war room. Which we dont by the way. You dont have a war room when you havent done anything wrong. Clinton certainly had a war room. I think nick on dxon did, but t actually did something wrong. So you say you are not taking it seriously. Yeah, we are. It is part of what we do 37 when you work for the Trump Administration, you are used to this kind of attention. We know how do this and we are preparing for it. Yes, were having lawyers look at it, yes, o rk, our pr people. If we didnt, we would be committing mal practice. But there is nothing extraordinary that were doing. Weve been dealing with oversight from the democrats since they took office. In fact it is all weve been dealing with because we certainly havent been doing much legislating since they have been here. Yes, maam. In light of the depositions that weve heard, do you believe that Rudy Giulianis role as an
outside adviser to the president is problematic . That is the president s call. Steve scalise got asked this and he said you may not like the fact i understand from reading his Opening Statement that Sondland Didnt Like Giuliani was involved and great. You may not like the fact. That is great. It is not impeachable. The president can use whoever he wants to use. If he wants to fire me today, he can. The president gets to set Foreign Policy and he gets to choose who. As long as it doesnt violate any laws regarding Confidential Information or classified material, the president gets to use who he wants to. Did the president direct you or anyone else to work with Rudy Giuliani on ukraine . Yeah, when was it, there was a may meeting and i think thisw. Sondland mentioned it and im
pretty sure rick perry mentioned it yesterday that in the may meeting in the oval office, that i was in, i think senator johnson was there as well as mr. Volker was there, the president asked rick perry to work with mr. Giuliani. And did you think that was appropriate when you were asked as well . I wasnt asked. You were not asked. That was my question. Were you or anyone else asked. And the answer is that the president told rick perry who i think was sort of, you know the issue one of the reasons we were in there, we were talking about energy and ukraine. We were trying to get ukraine as an energy partner. And so the president said to mr. Perry, talk to rudy. You havent asked a question yet. Yes. [ Inaudible Question ] shadow Foreign Policy, that is a team that you are using. What is a shadow Foreign Policy . The president operating outside the normal channels. Who else is in the room . Who is in the room when the president is having this conversation, okay . Gordon sondland, ambassador to the eu, kurt volker who was our special designated envoy to the ukraine. I sat next to mike pompeo yesterday at the meeting with the congressional leaders and pd look, i understand i coordinated a coup against you by Putting Sondland and Vom Ke Sondla Sondland and volker in chanlg of Ukraine Policy and he said you know, they both work for me. There is no Shadow Policy here. The president is entitled to have whoever he wants to work. Just to follow on that question, can you describe the role that you played in pressuring ukraine to investigate the bidens . And secondly, can you walk us through the meeting that President Trump was dangling over Volodymyr Zelensky to happen right here at the white house, what were the preconditions of that meeting and was investigating what was your question, what did i do to ukraine . Nothing. Did you do anything to pressure u ukraine to investig the bidens . No. And the second question is about the meeting at the white house between the two president s. You can walk us through the discussions for that meeting . What was on the table for a precondition and was the investigation of about a releba brought snup. No, i was never in a conversation that had the word barisma in it. Or the by denies. That never happened with me in there. But to the larger pointdenies. That never happened with me in there. But to the larger point, the president didnt want to take the meeting. That was mis rick perry was pushing for that. He said ill see you here at the white house. At the end, yes, but i think
that was a courtesy that he was extending. And he has not been here yet. So he was not realistically entertaining a meeting with president zelensky. We get asked by foreign leaders all of the time to either come visit their country or are have them come visit here. And we try to be courteous and say yes. Some we accommodate and some we do not. I dont remember a serious Conversation Setting up an actual meeting. There were no dates discussed. I saw that as one of the typical pleasant fridays that we have and it wasnt dangling a meeting or anything like that. Is the president still going to welcome president Erdogan On November 13th . I think that depends on the next couple days. It is still on the schedule and i understand that Vice President pences meeting is going much longer than expected today. I hope that they are not having a Press Conference right now. But i think it is one of those wait and see things. The president has been clear about what he wants to see out of president erdogan. He wants a ceasefire now. He wants prisoners protected. Go down the long list of the things that the president has mentioned to president erdogan. And if were able to get that, then i think that meeting will go forward. If not, the president will review the possibility. You just said that you were involved in the process in which the money being held up temporarily from the country, whether or not the country they were assisting with an Ongoing Investigation. How is that not an establishment of an exchange, of a ququid pro . Those are the terms that you use. Look at what Gordon Sondland said in his testimony, i think in his Opening Statement he said something along the lines of they were trying to get the deliverable. And the deliverable was a statement by the ukraine about how they were going to deal with corruption. Okay . Read his testimony. And what he says, and hes right, that is absolutely
ordinary course of business. This is what you do. When you have someone come to the white house, you either arrange a visit for the president , you have a phone call with the president , a lot of times we use that as the opportunity to get them to make a statement of their policy or to announce something that they are going to do. One of the reasons that then you can sort of announce that on the phone call or at the meeting. This is the ordinary course of Foreign Policy. Yes. Is it appropriate for any president or this president to pressure a foreign country to investigate a political opponent . Every time i get that question, that is one of those things about it is. But so is when did you stop beating your wife. It assumes that the president did that. We havent done that. I said mr. Trump or any president. Im going to talk about what this president did. The president s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani said he sees his work as the president s personal attorney as intertwined with the president s National Agenda when it comit kit comes. Do you see that enter defined, is his political interests as a political candidate is intertwined with the national interests. I dont know how to answer that question except that the mr. Giuliani is his personal lawyer. Is it appropriate for a personal attorney to be work being in ukraine on issues that are supposed to be National Issues . Mr. Giuliani says there an Attorney Client privilege issue. Is that appropriate for his personal attorney to be working i dont know anything you inappropriate about that. The lady in the back be. Yes, maam. Thank you. You say Foreign Policy is not like in the previous administration. How does the president feel about north koreas break off with the u. S. . If the question is responding to breaking off talks, is there news in the last couple days on
that . Yes rk, october 5th. Sorry, im just not briefed on that. I apologize. Thank you, mr. Mull ve mulva. There are public reports that you are objecting within the president s official family to the appointment of Ken Cuccinelli to head up the department of homeland security. Is that so and if so, what is your objection to his possible appointment . I have not and i think ken will be good at the job be. Yes, maam. Sorry. Did i really ignore you the whole time youre in the front row . Sorry. So if there was no quid pro quo on the call, if it was routine, if he didnt even want to do it and it is all on the up and up, why did it have to go into this other server . Im glad we got that. A good one to finish on. Im not going to answer your question the way you want me to, but ill answer your question. So give me a second. Im not going to sit here and talk about how we handle classified information in this building. I got a couple questions about wi my private conversations with the president and i wont talk about that. There is only one reason people care, but they think there a coverup. Some hope that there a coverup, oh, my goodness, there must have been something dunderhanded abot how they handled this document. Because there must be a coverup. Is nix on had a coverup with th tapes, clinton with the relationship with lewinsky. There must be a coverup. If we wanted to cover this up, would we have called the Department Of Justice almost immediately and had them look at the transcript of the tape, which we did . If we wanted to cover this up, would we have released to the public . And by the way, im glad now all this concern about how the document has been edited, because i heard adam schiff go
on television yesterday or the day before and say we dont need to hear from the list because now we have the memorandum of communication. Everyone wants to believe there is a coverup. You dont stuff to the publgived say here it is. So i wont explain about how we handle documents in the building. Im telling you that you can stop asking the questions be