yes we look at the the. short handled all the transcript of the memorandum of conversation. and we ensure that that transcription is as close to accurate as possible given our requirements of the presidential records act ok and . a colonel in mn testified that he thought it was very accurate he did you as well i viewed it as complete and accurate ok. heard of him and did articulate that he had a couple edits he wanted barisan inserted i think it was on page 3 or 4. in place of the company in one of the sections where presidents alinsky was talking you were that at request i understand that he said in either this proceeding or the deposition that that he wanted that request yes ok at the time did you understand that he had asked for that i don't recall that it was my practice if if it had it was if i believed in edit accurately represent the call i would accept it if i

didn't hear it in the call if it didn't exist in my notes i would have made the edit ok. yeah he just on page 41 of the swapped out the word company for. and when that at it from colonel vision was not install did he give you any negative feedback that it was crucial that that added get in the document now that i can recall ok did he ever raise any concerns to you about the accuracy of the transcript not that i can recall if he ever raise any concerns do you generally about the call when we were discussing. the. track changes version of the memcache on i believe you are pretty he had some concerns about the cole flood believe we we both agreed we wanted that more full throated embrace of presidents he and his reform agenda and if we didn't get it ok

. you indicated in your deposition that when you took over the portfolio for dr hill july 15th you were alerted to potential issues in colonel women's judgment yes. did she really anything specific to you specifically to you why she thought not not as such it was more of a overarching statement from her and. her deputy who became my deputy that. they had concerns about judgment ok. did any other n.s.c. personnel raise concerns with you about mr been yes i'm sorry colonel them and and what were some of those concerns that were brought to your tension they were ok

and we you know. it's not often. and they're instructed not to answer because i think that it's it's beyond the scope of what you're asking for these these concerns mr castor pre-dated any involvement in with ukrainian is 6 sector assistance. well during the deposition i asked you mr marson whether others raised the concern that mr colonel them and may have leaked information you did ask that yes yeah and your answer was others that represented that yes ok and i asked you whether you were concerned colonel women did not keep you in the loop at all times with his official duties yes and in fact when he went to the national security council lawyers following the july 25th call he did not 1st come to you is that correct correct and you were his. supervisor in

the chain of command correct correct and in hindsight did you wish that he had come to you 1st before going to the lawyers yes and why is that. one is if you had concerns about something about the content of the call that's something i would expect to have been notified of i also think just as a matter of practice since we both went to the lawyers we didn't necessarily both need to and economy of effort may have prevailed ok at any point subsequently he did he become frustrated that he felt cut out of some some of the ukraine portfolio yes and what was the nature of his concerns well. that he sways say it is he was concerned with respect to for example the ukraine trip that he was not he did not go. he asked me why is my practice to have. a number of the conversations with ambassador taylor one on one.

and there were certain other matters ok and did you ever get the sense that you resolved his concerns or did they linger. i explain to him my thinking and. that was that ok. before my time expires ambassador volker i want to turn quickly to the. bassett or taylor describes as the irregular channel. he he was a purchase a parent with you you an ambassador psalm 1. 150 messages correct correct and so he did he ever raise concerns about. what was what was going on during the time period of the early august time period of only as you saw all reflected in the text messages themselves where he said is this

now a linkage or are we doing this he had a concern about just in general you know rudy giuliani who think all of us had to but the issue is what do you do about it. about the role that he's playing. and as you noted we were in frequent contact near daily contact throughout this entire period and so did did he ever engage you in a one on one telephone call to articulate his concerns not know we were on many one on one telephone calls he did not raise those concerns that way now ok and this i mean you're. experienced diplomat at one point time senate confirmed ambassador simon is a master to the european union secretary perry's. secretary of energy certainly not. doesn't sound like an irregular bunch did he

ever articulate to you that he thought. the 3 of you working on ukraine policy was a problem no he did not and were you surprised during his testimony when he came into the deposition when he sort of established these 2 tracks that one was a regular channel that he was in charge of and the other was a yes and i i i don't agree with his characterization of that because i have been in my role for a couple of years i have been the lead on u.s. ukraine negotiations and you negotiated with russia and the interagency work and work with our allies and we have a secretary of energy was a cabinet official and i think having support from various u.s. officials for our strengthening our engaging with ukraine i viewed as a very positive thing and if the concern is not us so much then because we're all u.s. officials but a marriage giuliani i don't view that as a channel at all because he's not a represent of the u.s.

government he's a private citizen i viewed him as a useful barometer in understanding what may be helpful communication from the ukrainian government but not someone in a position to represent the u.s. government at all ok thank you. ok why don't we take a 5 or 10 minute break if i could ask the audience to allow the witnesses to leave the room 1st. we are in recess. been watching the 3rd public day of impeachment hearings on capitol hill listening to the testimony of 2 senior officials or former senior officials a timorous news the former national security council official who listened in on a phone call between a president trump and the ukrainian president which is the heart of this impeachment inquiry who said that he did not have anything concerned him on the call but he did end up referring it to the lawyers because he was concerned that

the content might leak and be damaging and we also heard there from. folco who said that the he did not know of a link a linkage between the hold on security assistance and ukraine pursuing investigations he said no one had ever said that to me and i never conveyed such a linkage to the ukrainians i think we bring in our guest card wilcox who's a professor of government at georgetown university joins us live from washington d.c. thanks very much indeed for watching all of this with us what's your impression of how the hearing has gone on this on this 3rd day of the hymns. well so i think this afternoon what the republicans have tried to do is create some doubt enter into the facts but more importantly to offer an alternative explanation and that is that the. the president was really concerned about corruption because he

was getting a bad information feed from giuliani as soon as he found out that the new government was really going to address corruption then he lifted the aid and so that's i think the major takeaway these 2 witnesses were not great for the president both of them and sinking feelings in their stomach they both of them expressed grave reservations about some of the linkages but i think that's the republican strategy right now so i mean do you think that the impression that focus for trade of a situation where he was he was kind of slightly out of the loop in terms of what might have been suggested in about an investigation linked to the biden is that what did you make of that that we were you persuaded by that well that's what he has to say right there's 2 ways to read it what is that that's possibly true that he was out of the loop and that the president was conducting most of this through other channels the other is that he's really worried that if his involvement became

more better known that he would be facing some repercussions. and i have no idea what he has is true what you think the main weakness is in this and the whole impeachment inquiry we're going to see what we're hearing just today for the democrats and what's the kind of best strong suit in it. well so this morning they're brave they had a really strong morning they had really strong witnesses who stood their ground who looked very professional who indicated their loyalty to america i thought the. the call out to the father of the colonel was a really nice gesture there will problem with this compared to say watergate is this is a really complicated story i mean honestly most americans don't know where ukraine is on a map of the world right and then one party versus the other corruption and this and that and the story becomes very very hard for the average american to figure out. and i think the democrats sort of position where they must investigate and i

mean is that your impression and that people's eyes might have been excited to begin now that the glazing over and thinking about what i have to suffer instead of actually watching that kind of granular detail this being discussed here this was a grounding 3 hours. you're looking but just in terms of the historical perspective you can just give us a an idea of why it's such a big deal to even be having impeachment hearings well we've only done this a few times in our history. the wonder gates story was a really simple story to understand they break in and they steal things there's bribery there's obstruction of justice this is a much more complicated one but really it's a serious issue and i think the democrats can't ignore it i think they have to investigate and i think they have to take a vote on it thank you very much indeed for your thoughts clyde wilcox i appreciate

you watching this for us until just not there when the fishes will say i've been sitting through this is well so notice the republican at the beginning of this it called it a circus and clearly that's their intent is to discredit the whole the whole process so here's an idea of what the president has been what his reaction has been to 2 events today. well i think what's important is something that the guest just touched on it was a bad afternoon for the president but the last 2 witnesses and the people who are still giving evidence just know actually people that have been called by the republicans know essentially dismantled one of the main republican talking points when he said in his opening statement that he didn't believe that joe biden would be involved in anything approaching corruption that would bring dishonor to the office of vice president and he made that clear to rudy giuliani as well and then as far as to morris is concerned there's a very interesting point where he says that he listened to the call he didn't think

that the president had said anything untoward but he immediately started making moves to put that on to a secure server because he was worried about what people might see you know if he did nothing wrong you would wonder why on earth would he put that on to the server and try and keep it away from people who didn't have certain security clearance as for donald trump ball donald trump says that he watched part of the impeachment hearing in the morning that he didn't know the people that were giving evidence but again insisting that he did absolutely nothing wrong but the white house is giving up its defense what is interesting is that jennifer wilson was one of those who gave evidence this morning here in washington she is a top aide to mike pence who is the vice president and she said that she thought the call was very unusual and she'd been involved in a number of calls she actually listened then to the call in july with presidents

allegedly of ukraine and keith kellogg who is the national security adviser to the vice president suddenly puts a statement this afternoon saying that he was also on the call and he saw nothing untoward so they're constantly trying to undercut. the whole narrative the democrats are trying to build here and also undercut i suppose with him and he did say that it was that he thought it was improper and he was he couldn't believe his ears when he when he heard the call that that they're trying to discredit him and raise suggestions that his judgment was ill. well there is the fact that he was actually born in ukraine he came to the united states as a toddler and the republicans made the point that he'd been offered allegedly offered the job of defense minister in ukraine 3 times but turned it down each and every time what's important is the 10 colonel that him and said that as soon as he was approached he thought it was inappropriate and he went to superiors so what the

republicans unwittingly uncovered is that telling colonel has a track record of hearing things that he thinks sort of inappropriate and then going to superiors and saying i think this is inappropriate you remember that this man is a career army officer he was wounded in fallujah in 2004 he wears a pop or heart he says that he was it was important that he gave evidence and he made a show to his father which was a strong thing but he said he and his brothers did serve the united states because he believed this was the place that they do right so that is why he was giving evidence so i think republican efforts to try and undermine a man who many people will view as a war hero really badly by fire then there was one very telling point where devon una's who is the senior ranking republican on the committee referred to him as mr vigilant and he wasn't having the lieutenant colonel whitman said ranking member it's love tenet colonel that men that was a real almost like a few good men from the movie

a few good men if you remember that he was slapping him down making clear that i'm wearing the uniform you used the title. just talk us through the role of giuliani in all this because he figured quite prominently on a tangential in there and then that latest estimate we've been listening to why is he important and what was his role in all of this. how long of hugo. giuliani seems to be acting on donald seems to be was acting for donald trump he seems to have had a separate track to the ukrainian government he was pressuring the ukrainian government to launch some sort of inquiry into boris maher and by extension into joe biden he was being told by the man who became the discredited chief prosecutor that there were problems there those allegations were essentially disavowed by anyone who looked into them now giuliani continued to push that and he gave an interview to the new york times where he said he was working on behalf of his only

client who was the president of the united states and he was trying to do right for him and possibly also do right for the country so here this path into the ukrainian government and was pushing what seems to be his political agenda trying to get the ukrainians to announce that they were going to investigate the possibility of ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election by hijacking the democratic party's servers a conspiracy theory that has been widely divergent and absolutely eviscerated by the security services here in the united states and he also wanted an investigation into joe biden why would that happen or the pressure on that was stepped up to announce this investigation when joe biden started to look as if he might run for president and all those early polls suggested that in the street much up between donald trump and joe biden joe biden would when the polls of change slightly since then but that is why rudy giuliani plays such a very big part in this here's another interesting development just in the last few

hours mitch mcconnell who is the democrat republican leader in the senate of course once the house has dealt with this and if it recommends impeachment proceedings it goes to a trial in the senate and mitch mcconnell has said that he thinks it's inconceivable the actual words that they would get 67 votes to remove the president from office so. he's saying that we haven't made a decision how we would go on from here but he doesn't see what's come out so far as to be enough to tip the balance and have a number of republicans jump the fence and see yet this is when we want to see donald trump impeached but let me give you a historical part of well back during watergate the number of people the number of republicans who didn't believe that richard nixon should be impeached was roughly about where they are at the moment what is more and more information came out that changed and suddenly republicans realized the hard new option but to paris ahead

with impeachment even though that was something that they weren't keen on. for the time being thank you very much indeed and let's bring back in the tide will close a professor of government at georgetown university just on that on that issue of where it goes next obviously there are a few more several more days of testimony to expect who will be the key witnesses in making this something that actually has legs and does eventually go to the senate well so it's hard to know whose testimony will be critical but there was a lot of talk about negotiating for bolton bolton has been throwing out hints that he has a lot of things to say and so there has to be a court hearing about whether he's allowed to testify or whatever but he certainly sounds like a witness that would be very important and then god will trump has been tweeting that he might testify and i think that would just be delightful i think that would be the critical witness of the whole procedure it's hard for me to imagine him making 5 minutes without perjuring himself and is that what he had said that he

testified at the inn or not you know do you think that would be in the form of a written testimony rather than an appearance. you know. it's obvious that they're trying to control him and having no success he's tweeting out witness intimidation tweets day after day and all of his lawyers are telling him stop it stop it so who knows what the band might do i mean he he's under pressure i assume they would die but they would tell him very very firmly don't go and testify but who knows you remind us that the the process i mean that this kind of these hearings will conclude and then want to talk us through the whole process of impeachment how it actually works well then the house of representatives will float on the impeachment impeachment is an indictment and i think at this point they will vote to impeach so he will be one of the few presidents in our history that has

actually been impeached but he's not removed from office at this point it goes to a senate where it requires an extraordinary majority i think mitch mcconnell is probably right there's not 67 votes to remove i don't know honestly what it would take to get to 67 votes but i have been told by a few people on the hill that if they had a secret ballot vote that they might get a lot more republicans voting to remove him there's a lot of republicans who are pretty upset about this who think it's very inappropriate but in a roll call vote they're not likely to vote to remove the president in terms of the damage that even if he if president trump isn't impeached and this ends up being just kind of evidence that's produced over several days well what's the potential damage to him electorally from this even without impeachment. well we're a very polarized nation and so his supporters are really rallying behind him they

say they believe the nunes is right that this is a coup that they're trying to remove a man who won the popular vote he didn't win the popular vote course so parallel to this would be the impeachment of bill clinton and one of the things that happened there was republicans. you know were pushing and pushing but democrats really solidified support for him the difference of that case was the bill clinton was widely regarded by most people at least democrats and independents and some republicans as having done a good job as president that's not so true for donald trump but i think that at the end of the day republicans will have become more intense but there might be doubts in their mind you know also. but it's hard to know how it plays out but i would guess it doesn't help donald trump let's put it that way and what about the political damage and times if the u.s. is standing internationally. this is a terrible for us it's terrible for our standing it really gives us the an

indication that many of the things we've been saying we believe that for a really long time simply aren't true that we're not the bully we're willing to push people around for our own political agenda clyde wilcox a professor of government at georgetown university thank you very much indeed for joining us here on al-jazeera. and you've been watching some special coverage of the peach mint inquiry into donald trump stablish trying to establish whether the president improperly tried to pressure ukraine's president as event to investigate one of his main democratic rivals a joe biden during a phone call that the 2 had after the election of his events which was to congratulate him and we've been hearing from witnesses throughout the afternoon and we'll continue to cover that story and the rest of these hearings when they resume and that's in a few minutes time and meantime thank you very much indeed for watching that's all from london more from our colleagues in doha in just in the minutes from now.

white supremacist violence is on the rise in america he was about in this whole underground network 8 full time speaks to the victims of recent attacks when he shot me i turned around and he were killed my daughter and i asks how an ideology of loathing has found its way into the mainstream can you draw a through line between the rhetoric of president trump and the conservative media in america to what happened here in el paso license to hate on al-jazeera think the prime minister. should do to the british on the 31st of october and making this country the greatest place on a british departure is delayed for home follow the drama of bricks it on al-jazeera

to deal with poverty unless you deal with the gap you disagree i disagree with that toy it sounds like blaming the public the country for the are not literally me anybody these people are well trained as much a part of office obviously an extent machinery as the very inspirational populace that altered future joint. many are some as i put it up for questions to my special guests to challenge them to some straight talking political debate here al-jazeera it's a tough time for the afghan security forces taliban attacks have increased their suffering heavy casualties and the prospect of a withdrawal of u.s. forces hangs over them yet young men are still joining up some for potshots at reasons for others it's the only way to get a job despite the risks midway's curry b. was an army bomb disposal engineer in helmand province he knew the risks he was blinded in both eyes and lost a leg when a roadside device exploded as you try to defuse it always aware of the danger of

seeing friends wounded while working on mines i wasn't scared to lose an arm or a leg is to sacrifice we have to like to serve this country. this is al jazeera. play on for the bathtub or this is the news hour live from my headquarters in doha a top story this hour testimony from more witnesses in the beach many inquiries into donald trump former u.s. envoy kurt volker says he should have realized why trump was holding up aid to ukraine earlier 2 witnesses who listened in on trump's july phone conversation with ukraine's president described his comments as improper and unusual.