politicalecretary for affairs, david hale, will be thisling to brussels later week. we will have conversations with 28 european counterparts. this is a meeting happens about every six months. this gathering is important because it precedes a foreign ministerial on iran. that's just been scheduled. it shows once again our close cooperation with our european partners on issues of mutual concern. while david's there, the issue of iran and iraq will be featured prominently in their conversations and they will have an opportunity to discuss syria, north korea and china as well. one more personnel matter -- i want to thank ambassador john bass who i have come to know in my time of service, both as the director of the cia and secretary of state. of service in ur kabul was one of our most important commissions. he is a man of incredible integrity and has helped that country to a brighter, more peaceful, and more secure future for the people. i would like to welcome the two new ambassadors. including ambassador sullivan. glad they are getting after the and i'm happy to have m

undersecretary of state for political affairs david hale explained that "this was future assistance not to keep the army going now." this isn't money that had to flow every month in order to fund current purchases or something like that. it was 5-your money. what it is obligated, it is there for five years and usually takes quite a bit of time to spend element. the idea somehow that during a couple of months in july, august, and up till septembe september 11th, 55 to 48 days, depending on how you count it that this was somehow denying critical assistance to the ukrainians on the front line right then is simply not true. the house managers have tried to pivot away from that, because they know it is not true. they say it was a signal to the russians. it was a signal of lack of support that the russians would pick up on. it is critical. even the ukrainians did not know that the aide had been paused. and part of the reason was, if they never brought it up in any conversations with representatives of the u.s. government, and as ambassador volker testified, representatives of the u.s. governm

and undersecretary state for political affairs david hale explained this is future assistance. and i mentioned this the other day. it n it's not like this money is being spent month by month to supply current needs in the ukraine. it fi it's five-year money. it can go to u.s. firms providing materials to the ukrainians and it doesn't get spent down finally in materials shipped to ukraine for a long time. so a delay of 45 or 55 taste depend how long you count it and the money released before the end of the fiscal year has no real effect. it not current money. despite what we've heard about the idea that on the front lines of donbass ukrainian soldiers are being put at risk. that's not accurate. and in an interview in "the new york times," it was said the hold came so quickly, he didn't even in the a chang. the ukrainians, president zelensky and others have made it abundantly clear there was the

undersecretary of state david hale explained the apostate was future assistance, not to keep the army going now. so the made up narrative that security assistance was conditioned on ukraine taking some action on investigations is for the disparate by the straight for fact of the aid was deliveredfo on september 11, 209 without ukraine taking any action on any investigation. it's interesting to note that the obama administration withheld $585 million of promised aid to egypt in 2013 but the administrations public message was that the money was not officially on hold as technically it was not due until september 30th. the end of the fiscal year. so they didn't have to disclose the halt to anyone. sounds like this may be a practice of a number of administrations. in fact, to the president, this president, there's been concern about how aid is being put forward. so there have been pauses on for eight and a variety of contexts. september 2019 the administration announced it was withholding the over $100 million in aid million dollars in aid to afghanistan over concerns about government cor

under secretary of state david hale, george kent and ambassador volker testified there was i know connectionbassador volker. you believe the policy issues were valid, correct. yes. did the president ever say to you that he was not going to allow aid to the united states to go to the ukraine unless there were investigations into the bidens or the 26 elections? 50 investigations into the bidens or the 26 elections? so no he did not. did the ukrainians tell you they understand they would not get a meeting with the president a phone call with the president, military aid or foreign call with the president, military aid orforeign aid call with the president, military aid or foreign aid from the us unless they undertook investigations of the bidens or the 26th elections? no, they did not. studio: you are watching us here on bbc news as we follow the impeachment trial. this is donald trump's defence, presentation, that we are currently witnesses on a saturday sitting of the opening of the senate house. white house council at the —— counsel, lining out president trump's defence, and essentially six k

david hale. under secretary of state for political affairs. he was called by the house , you saw his testimony we never saw the upper one - - had the opportunity to cross-examine if we have witnesses we have to have the opportunity to do that. there were other witnesses called that you saw their testimony special advisor for ukraine negotiations the deputy associate director for national security programs, christopher anderson special advisor for ukraine negotiation. you heard their testimony referred to, we did not have the opportunity to cross-examine them. so this isn't going to happen if witnesses are called, in one week those are just the witnesses that have been produced by the house managers. you are being called upon to make consequential constitutional decisions. consequential. decisions. for our constitution. we talk about the burden of proof. i have said this before i will say it again, 31 times the manager said they prove their time line - - the case 29 times it was overwhelming. manager nadler, he didn't over one - - only say it w

many times and apparently to many people, under secretary of state david hale, george kent and ambassadorr all testified that there was no connection between security assistance and investigations. >> you believe that the policy issues that he raised concerning ukraine were valid, correct? >> yes. >> did the president of the united states ever say to you i'm going to allow aid of the united states to go to ukraine unless there were investigations into barisma the bidens and the 2016 elections? >> no, he did not. >> did the ukrainians ever tell you that they understood that they would not get a meeting with the president of the united states, a phone call with the president of the united states, military aid or foreign aid from the united states unless they undertook investigations of barism and the bidens and the 2016 elections? >> no, they did not. >> the house managers never said that, why not? why they didn't show you this testimony, why they didn't tell you about the testimony? why they didn't full testimony in full and proper context for your consideration? because none of this fits

ambassador yovanovitch sent for david hale, an email detailing her concerns and asking for a strong statement of support from the state department. in reply, the state department told her that they were unwilling to help her. their own ambassador. if they issued a public statement supporting her "you could be undermined" by the president trump. their concern that "the rug will be pulled out from underneath the state department." the state department cannot express support for an american ambassador, threatened abroad because they are concerned that if they express support for that american ambassador, the rug will be pulled out from under them by the president. what it must've taken to commence our state department to refuse to support its ambassad ambassador. phone records show that mr. giuliani also kept the white house uprise of these developments. as you can see from the slides. again, it is worth remembering that smearing ambassador yovanovitch was a means to an end. removing her would allow the president's allies the freedom to pressure ukraine to announce their sham investigations. so,

it's also important to note that as ambassador david hale testified that foreign aid generally was undergoing a review in 2019. from page 84 of his november 6, 2019 testimony, he said the administration did not want to take a, sort of, business-as-usual approach to foreign assistance, a feeling that once a country has received a certain assistance package, it's something that continues forever. didn't talk about that in their 23-hour presentation. dr. fiona hill confirmed this review and testified on november 21, 2019. i'm going to again quote from page 75 of her testimony, that quote, there had been a directive for wholesale -- a whole scale review of our foreign policy, foreign policy assistance, and the ties between our foreign policy objectives and that assistance. this had been going on actually for many months. so, multiple witnesses testify that the president had long-standing concerns and specific concerns about ukraine. the house managers understandably ignore the testimony that took place before their own committees. in her testimony of october 14th, 2019, dr. hill testified at page

under secretary of state david hale, explained the pause was for future assistance, not to keep the army going now. the made up a narrative that security assistance was conditioned on ukraine taking some action on investigations is further disproved by the straightforward fact that the aide was delivered on september 11th 2019 without ukraine taking any action on any investigation. it's interesting to note that the obama administration withheld $585 million of promised aid to egypt in 2013 but the administration's public message was the money was not officially on hold as technically it was not due until september 30th. the end of the fiscal year. it sounds like this may be a practice of a number of administrations. to the president, this president has been concerned about how aid is being put forward. there have been pauses on foreign aid in a variety of contexts. in september of 2019, the administration announced it was withholding aid to afghanistan about concerns of government corruption. in august of 2019, president trump announces the administration and south korea were in talks to

under secretary of state david hale, george kent and ambassador volker all testified there was no connection whatsoever between security assistance and investigations. here's ambassador volker. >> you had a meeting with the president of the united states and you believe that the policy issues he raised concerning ukraine were valid, correct? >> yes. >> did the president of the united states ever say to you that he was not going to allow aid of the united states to go to ukraine unless there were investigations into brees burisma, the bidens or the 2016 elections? >> no, he did not. >> did the ukrainians ever tell you that they understood that they would not get a meeting with the president of the united states, a phone call with the president of the united states, military aid or foreign aid from the united states unless they unds to undertook investigations of burisma or the 2016 elections? >> no, they did not. >> the house managers never told you any of this. why not? why can't they shdidn't they sh testimony, why didn't they tell you about this testimony? why didn't they put ambassador so

under secretary of state david hale, explained the paused aid was future assistance, not to keep the army going now. so, the made up narrative that security assistance was conditioned on ukraine taking some action on investigations is further disproved by the straightforward fact that the aid was delivered on september 11 of 2019 without ukraine taking any action on any investigation. it's interesting to note that the obama administration withheld $585 million of promised aid to egypt in 2013, but the administration's public message was that the money was not officially on hold, aztec anically it was not due until september 30th, the end of the fiscal year so they didn't have to disclose the halt to anyone. sounds like this may be a practice of a number of administrations. in fact, to the president, this president has been concerned about how aid is being put forward. so, there have been pauses on foreign aid in a variety of context. in september of 2019, the administration announced that it was withholding over $100 million in aid to afghanistan over concerned about government corru

and our undersecretary for political affairs david hale will be traveling to brussels later this week. we'll have conversations with 28 european counterparts. this meeting happens about every six months. this particular gathering is important because it precedes the council on iran that has been scheduled and it shows our close cooperation with the european partners. i'm sure while david is there the issue of iran and iraq will feature prominently in their conversations and they'll have an opportunity also to discuss priorities such as syria, north korea and china as well. finally, one more personnel matter. i want to thank ambassador john bass who i have come to know in my time in service both as the director of the central intelligence agency and secretary of state. he's a strategic thinker. he's helped that country move forward to the more peaceful and more secure future for all of the afghans people. i want to welcome the new 11 ambassadors and two ambassadors at large confirmed at the end of november, including ambassador sullivan. with that i'm happy to take a few questions. >>

under secretary of state david hale explained the paused aid was future assistance, not to keep the army going now. so the made up narrative that security assistance was conditioned on ukraine taking some action on investigations is further disproved by the straightforward fact that the aid was delivered on september 11th, 2019, without ukraine taking any action on any investigation. it's interesting to note that the obama administration withheld $585 million of promised aid to egypt in 2013 but the administration's public message was that the money was not officially on hold as technically it was not due until september 30th. the end of the fiscal year. so day didn't have to disclose the halt to anyone. sound like this may be a practice of a number of administrations. in fact, to the president, this president has been concerned about how aid is being put forward. so there have been pauses on foreign aid in a variety of contexts. in september of 2019, the administration announced that it was withholding over $100 million in aid to afghanistan over concerns about government corruption. in

laura cooper deputy assistant secretary of defense for russia ukraine and eurasia again same thing david hale you know undersecretary of state for political affairs he was called by the house you saw his testimony we never had the opportunity to cross-examine if we have witnesses we have to have the opportunity to do that there were other witnesses that were called or you saw their testimony or heard their testimony or it was referred to katherine crawford the special advisor for ukraine negotiations department the state marks sandy the deputy associate director for national security programs and christopher anderson special advisor for ukraine negotiation department state you heard their testimony referred to we did not have the opportunity to cross-examine them so this isn't going to happen if witnesses are called in a week now that's just the witnesses that have been produced that you have seen by the house managers. you were being called upon to make consequential constitutional decisions consequential decisions for our constitution we talk about the burden of proof i've said this before

the president was actually interested in burden sharing because he didn't apparently according to david hale raise it in the telephone conversation that he had with gordon sandland that hale claims to have overheard at a restaurant in kiev but let's look at the real evidence as we explained on june 24th there is an e-mail in the record showing it's an e-mail from one person to the department of defense to another with the subject line of potest follow up present the united states follow up asking specifically about burden sharing it says. quote what do other nato members spend to support ukraine and quote that was what they were following up on for the president and in the transcript itself excuse me. and the tran the transcript of the july 25th call itself the president asked he said we spend a lot of effort and a lot of time for ukraine much more than the european countries are doing and they should be helping you more than we are germany does almost nothing for you all they do is talk and i think it's something you should really ask them about and he goes on to say that he talks to angela

i also want an ounce that our undersecretary for political affairs david hale will be traveling to brussels later this week we'll have conversations with 28 european counterparts this is a recurring meeting that happens about every 6 months at this particular gathering is important because it immediately proceeds an e.u. foreign ministerial on iran that has just been scheduled and it shows to once again our close cooperation with our european partners on issues of mutual concern i'm sure volved davids there the issue of iran and iraq will feature probably in their conversations and they'll have an opportunity also to discuss parties such as syria north korea and china as well finally one more person no matter i want to think about that or john bass who i've come to know in my time in service both as the director of the central intelligence agent now as secretary of state his 2 year tour of service in kabul was remarkable that's one of our most important missions ambassador bass is a respected strategic thinker a man of incredible integrity he's helped that country move forward to a brighter

ambassador yovanovitch understate political affairs david hale, an e-mail voicing her concern ab asked for a strong statements of support from the state department. in reply the state department told her they were unwilling to help her, their own ambassador, because if they issued a public statement supporting her, quote, it could be undermined, unquote, by the president. and their concern that, quote, the rug would be pulled out from underneath the state department. the state department cannot express support for an american ambassador threatened abroad because they are concerned that if they express support for that american ambassador, the rug will be pulled out from under them by the president. what it must have taken to convince our state department to refuse to support its ambassador. phone records show that giuliani also kept the white house apprised of these developments as you can see from these slides. again, it is worth remembering that smearing ambassador yovanovitch was a means to an end. removing her would an allow the president's allies to free to pressure ukraine to ann

under secretary of state david hale, george kent and ambassador volker all testified that there was nore's ambassador volker. >> you had a meeting with the president of the united states, and you believed that the policy issues he raised concerning ukraine were valid, correct? >> yes. >> did the president of the united states ever say to you that he was not going to allow aid from the united states to go to ukraine unless there were investigations into burisma, the bidens or 2016 elections? >> no, he did not. >> did the ukrainians ever tell you they understood they would not get a meeting with the president of the united states, a phone call with the president of the united states, military aid or foreign aid from the united states unless they undertook investigations of burisma, the bidens or the 2016 elections? >> no, they did not. >> the house managers never told you any of this. why not? why didn't they show you this testimony? why didn't they tell you about this testimony? why didn't they put ambassador sondland's testimony in its full and proper context for your consideration? be

it is also important to note that ambassador david hale testified there was a review going on in 2019 on page 84 of his november 6th, 2019, testimony he said the administration did not want to take a business as usual approach to foreign assistance, feeling that want the country has received a certain package it continues forever. didn't talk about that in the 23 hour presentation. doctor fiona hill confirmed this review and testified on the 21st 2019 and i will quote from page 75 of her testimony that there had been a directive for wholesale, wholesale review of our foreign policy, foreign-policy assistance and the ties between foreign-policy objectives and that assistance. this had been going on for many months. multiple witnesses testified that the president had long-standing specific concerns about ukraine. the house managers, understandably, ignore the testimony that took place before their own committees. in her testimony of october 14th, 2019, doctor hill testified on page 118-119 of her transcript that she thinks the president has quite publicly said that he was very skeptical

is no evidence he was interested in burden sharing because he did not apparently according toca david hale raise in the telephone conversation he had with sondland who claims to overheard that in a restaurant in key of. look at the real evidence. as we explained on june 24 there is an e-mail in the record to show an e-mail from one person from the department of defense to another with the subject line of follow-up asking specifically about burden sharing. it says "what do other members spend to support ukraine? that is what they were following up on for the president. and thetr transcript itsel itself, excuse me that we spend a lot of effort and time much more than the european countries and they should be helping you more than we are.do germany does almost nothing for you. all they do was talk i think it is something you should really ask them about . he goes on to say he talks to angela merkel about it when they are not doing as much as the united states to raise burden sharing and president zelensky agreed. so there isd evidence of connection between military assistance and investigatio

it is also important to note that ambassador david hale testified there was a review going on in 2019 on page 84 of his november 6th, 2019, testimony he said the administration did not want to take a business as usual approach to foreign assistance, feeling that want the country has received a certain package it continues forever. didn't talk about that in the 23 hour presentation. doctor fiona hill confirmed this review and testified on the 21st 2019 and i will quote from page 75 of her testimony that there had been a directive for wholesale, wholesale review of our foreign policy, foreign-policy assistance and the ties between foreign-policy objectives and that assistance. this had been going on for many months. multiple witnesses testified that the president had long-standing specific concerns about ukraine. the house managers, understandably, ignore the testimony that took place before their own committees. in her testimony of october 14th, 2019, doctor hill testified on page 118-119 of her transcript that she thinks the president has quite publicly said that he was very skeptical

under secretary of state david hale, explain the paused a way for assistance not to keep the army goingow. so the made-up narrative that security assistance was condition on ukraine taking some action on investigations is further disproved by the straightforward fact that the aide was delivered on september 11, 2019 without ukraine taking any action on any investigation. it is interesting to note that the obama administration withheld $585 million of promised aid to egypt in 2013. but the administration's public message was that the money was not officially on hold as technically it was not due until september 30. the end of the fiscal year. so they did not have to disclose the halt to anyone. sounds like this may be a practice of a number of administrations. in fact, to this president, this president has been concerned about how aid is being put forward. so there have been pauses on foreign aid and a variety of context. in september of 2019 the admitted thracian announced it was withholding over $100 million in aid from afghanistan with concerns about government corruption. in august o

as you know, david hale undersecretary of foreign affairs provided that the aid for ukraine was futuregreater impact, president trump's temporary pause of 48 days on future aid that is now going to be delivered to aid or president obama's steadfast refusal to provide aid to ukraine for three years, more than 1,000 days while they attempted to push back russia's aggression and attempt to preserve its sovereignty. >> mr. chief justice and thank you, senators, for that question. it is far more serious and far more jeopardy for the ukrainians the decision of the obama administration to not use the authority given by congress that many of you all, and many of the members of the house of representatives voted for giving the u.s. government the authority to provide lethal aid to the ukrainians and the obama administration decided not to provide the aid. multiple witnesses called into the house democrats testified that united states' policy toward ukraine got stronger under the trump administration in part largely because of the lethal aid. ambassador yovanovitch, ambassador volker, others als

undersecretary of state david hale, the most consider diplomat at the state department testified that marie yovanovitch was an outstanding ambassador and should have been permitted to remain in kyiv. even more significant, several more witnesses testified that president trump's decision to remove ambassador yovanovitch undercut u.s. national security objectives in ukraine during a critical time. dr. hill, for example, explained that many of the key u.s. policies towards ukraine were being implemented by the u.s. embassy in kyiv, and then suddenly, quote, we had just then lost the leadership. this created what hill labeled, and i quote, a period of uncertainty as to how our government was going to execute u.s. policy. george kent testified that the ouster of ambassador yovanovitch, quote, hampered u.s. efforts to establish rapport with the new zelensky administration in ukraine. so why did president trump remove a distinguished career public serve anxiety, an anti-corruption crusader and a top diplomat in the state department? well, we know why. the answer is simple. president trump re

the president was actually interested in burden sharing because he didn't apparently according to david haleraise it in the telephone conversation that he had with gordon sondland at haleclaims to have overheard at a restaurant in kia but let's look at the real evidence as we explained on june 24 , there's an email in the record showing an email from one person at the department of defense to another with the subject line of follow-up, president of the united states follow-up asking about burden sharing. it says quote, what do other nato members tend to support ukraine? that was what they were following up on for the president and in the transcript itself, excuse me , in the transcript of the july 25 call itself, the president asks, he said we spent a lot of effort and a lot of time for ukraine, much more than the european countries are doing and they should be helping you more than we are. germany does almost nothing for you. all they do is talk and i think it's something you should really ask them about and he goes on to say that he talked to angela markel about it and he's raising burden

president was actually interested in burden sharing, because he did not apparently, according to david haleraise it in the telephone conversation that he had with gordon sondland that have claims to have overheard in a restaurant in kiev. let's look at the real evidence. as we explained, on june 24, there is an email on the record showing that email from one person in the department of defense to another, with a follow-up,e of potus asking specifically about burden sharing. "what do other nato ukrainespend to support ?" that is what they were following up on with the president. in the transcript itself -- excuse me -- in the transcript of the july 25 call it, the president asked -- he said, "we spend a lot of effort and time with ukraine, much more than european countries are doing, and they should be helping you more than we are." the germans have done almost nothing for you. all they do is talk, and i think it is something you should really ask them about." he goes on to say that he talked with angela merkel about it, and that they are not really doing as much as the united states is doin

it's also important to note that his ambassador david hale testified the foreign aid generally was undergoingeview in 2019. from page 84, of his november 6th 2019, testimony. he said the administration did not want to takemb those sort of business as usual approach to foreign assistance. a feeling that was a country has received a certain assistance package, is something that continues forever. he did talk about that they did it talk about that in the 23 hour presentation. doctor fiona hill, confirmed this review and testified on page 75 of her testimony that quote there had been a directive for wholesale a whole scale review of the foreign policy. foreign policy assistance. the ties between foreign policy objectives and that assistance. this had been going on actually for many months. so multiple witnesses testified that the president had long-standing concerns and specific concerns about ukraine. the house managers understand understandably ignore the testimony that took place before their own committees. in her testimony of octobe october 14th, 2019, doctor hill testified on pages 118 and

testified to pause on the aid was not significant, and under the secretary osecretaryof state fo, david hale announced this and i mentioned it the other day it's not like the money is being spent month by month is suspend the current aid. once it is obligated, it can go to the u.s. firms providing material to the ukrainians, and it doesn't get sent down finally in material shifts to ukraine for a long time. so the delay of 48 to 55 days depending on how you count it and the money being released before the end of the fiscal year ends up having no real effect. it's not current money it is supplying the need despite what we have heard about the idea on thee front lines the ukrainian soldiers are being put at risk. that just isn't accurate. we also know from the minister of defense that came so quickly he didn't even notice any change. a member of the ukrainians didn't even know. president zelensky and his advisor, andriy yermak and others made it abundantly clear there's another interview just the i other day with -- they di't know the aid was withheld and then he said there was a panic because

the president was actually interested in burden sharing because he didn't apparently according to david haleraise it in the telephone conversation that he had with gordon sondland at haleclaims to have overheard at a restaurant in kia but let's look at the real evidence as we explained on june 24 , there's an email in the record showing an email from one person at the department of defense to another with the subject line of follow-up, president of the united states follow-up asking about burden sharing. it says quote, what do other nato members tend to support ukraine? that was what they were following up on for the president and in the transcript itself, excuse me , in the transcript of the july 25 call itself, the president asks, he said we spent a lot of effort and a lot of time for ukraine, much more than the european countries are doing and they should be helping you more than we are. germany does almost nothing for you. all they do is talk and i think it's something you should really ask them about and he goes on to say that he talked to angela markel about it and he's raising burden

david hale, secretary of state for political affairs. he was called, to the house, you saw his testimony, we never had the opportunity to cross-examine. if we have witnesses we have to have the opportunity to do that. there were other witnesses that were called or you saw there testimony or heard their testimony what was referred to catherine, special advisor for ukraine negotiation, department of state, sandy, the deputy of entry deputy, and christopher anderson for ukraine department of state. you heard the testimony referred to, we did not have the opportunity to cross-examine them. so this is awkward to happen if witnesses are called in a week. that is just the witnesses that have been produced that you have seen by the house managers. you are being called upon to make consequential constitutional decisions, consequential decisions for constitution. we talk about the proof, i'll say this before, 31 times, the manager said they prove their case 29 times they said the evidence was overwhelming. manager nadler, he didn't only say it was

ambassador yovanovitch sent the undersecretary david hale an email detailing her concerns and asking for a strong statement of support from the state department . in reply, the state department told her they were unwilling to help her. they wrote ambassador, because of the issue of public publicly supporting her it could be undermined by the president. and they're concerned that quote, the rug would be pulled out from underneath the state department. the state department cannot express support for an american ambassador left abroad because they are concerned that if theyexpress support to that american ambassador the rug will be pulled out from under them by the president . what it must have taken to convince our state department to refuse support for its ambassador. phone records show that giuliani kept the white house apprised of these developments. as you can see from these slides. again, it is worth remembering that smearing ambassador yovanovitch was a means to an end. removing her would allow the president's allies the freedom to pressure the ukraine to announce their shan inve

president was actually interested in burden sharing because he didn't apparently, according to david halein the telephone conversation that he had with sondland heard at a restaurant in kiev. as we explained on june 24, there's an e-mail in the record showing from one person in the department of defense to another with a sub line of "potus follow up" asking specifically about burden sharing. it says "what do other nato members spend to support ukraine." that's what they were following up on for the president. and in the transcript itself -- excuse me. in the transcript of the july 25 call itself, the president asked, he said, we spent a lot of effort and a lot of time for ukraine. much more than the european countries are doing and they should be helping you more than we are. germany does almost nothing for you. all they do is talk and i think it's something that you should really ask them about. and he goes on to say that he talks to angela merkel about it. and that they're not really doing as much as the united states is doing. he's raising burden sharing. president zelensky agreed with

under secretary of state david hale explained this is future assistance.ined this the other day. it's not like the money is being spent month by month to supply current needs in the ukrainian. it's five-year money. once it is obligated, it can go to u.s. firms that are providing material to the ukrainians and it doesn't get spent down finally and material shift to ukrainian for a long time. so a delay of 48 or 55 days, depending how you count it and the money being released before the end of the fiscal year ends up having no real effect. it's not current money. it's supplying immediate needs. despite what we've heard about the identify that on the front lines in the donbas, soldiers are being put at risk. that's not accurate. and we also know from the deputy minister of defense that gave an interview to "the new york times" and explain the hold came and went so quickly that he didn't even notice any change. remember, the ukrainians didn't even know. president zelensky and his advisers had made it abundantly clear, another interview the other day with danil

the house, jennifer williams, alexander vindman, gordon sondland, william taylor, laura cooper, david halegeorge kent, all of those people, all the people that testified at the house hearings were corroborating the whistleblower account and saying there was a quid pro quo with ukraine and let me further add the american people support, i think the figure is 75% of the american people want to hear from witnesses. republican senators do not want to hear the truth. they don't want to hear the witnesses, they don't want to look at the documents and bolton has firsthand knowledge of the call. the whistleblower does not, so i don't understand that republican talking point. host: stafford, virginia, next, dan on the republican line. thing for the other party making accusations is really unfortunate because you have to bring up things in the past to prove your innocence, not prove you are not guilty, but prove your innocence. descent and iic am amazed there was all that talk and all that concern of beingen at the border held in cages was not out there. they did not get one mention during this, but

i also want to announce that our undersecretary for political affairs david hale will travel to brussels'll have conversations with 28 european counterparts this is recounter meeting that happens every six months. this particular gather something important because it immediately precedes foreign ministerial on iran and has been scheduled. shows close cooperation with our european partners on issues of mutual concern. i'm sure while david is there the issue of iran and iraq will feature problem menially in their conversations and they will have the opportunity to talk about syria, north korea and china as well. finally one more personnel matter. i want to thank ambassador john bass who i am come to know in time of service as director of the central intelligence agency and secretary of state. his go year service in kabul was remarkable. that is one of the most important missions. ambassador bass is respective thinker, a man of incredible integrity. he helped the country move forward to brighter, peaceful future for afghan people. i want to welcome new 11 ambassadors and two ambassadors at

i will also announce that david hale will be traveling to brussels later this week review of conversationsarts. this is a recurring meeting that happens about every six months. this particular gathering is important because it immediately precedes and e.u. foreign ministerial on iran that has just been scheduled. it shows come too, once again, our close cooperation with european partners on issues of mutual concern. the issue of iran and iraq will feature prominently in their conversations and they will have an opportunity to discuss priorities such as syria, north korea, and china, as well. finally, one more personnel matter. i want to think about star john bass, who have come to know as my time in service, now secretary of state. his tour of service in kabul wasn't markable. that's one of our most important missions. the ambassador is the structured strategicthinker. a man of integrity. he is help the country moved to a more peaceful and secure future for all the afghan people. i want to welcome our new 11 investors and two ambassadors at large confirmed since the end of november, includ

david hale. undersecretary of state for political affairs. he was called.d the opportunity to call him. if we have witnesses, we have to are have to opportunity to do that. there were other witnesses -- and what was referred to, catherine croft, special adviser for ukraine negotiations. and special adviser for ukraine negotiation. you've heard their testimony referred to and we didn't have the opportunity to cross examine them. this isn't going to happen if witnesses are called in a week. what you have seen by the house managers. you are being called upon to make consequential constitutional decisions. consequential decisions. for our constitution. we talk about the burden of proof. i've said this before. 31 times the managers said they proved their case. 29 times they said the evidence was overwhelming. manager nadler, he didn't only say it was overwhelming in his view. on page 739 of the congressional record he's very clear. he says not only is it strong, there is no -- that's what he says. quoting me, talking about mr. nadler, saying beyond any doubt? it

and david hale explained this was future assistance to not keep the army going now.that had to flow every month to fund current purchases or something like that. it's five-year money. once there, it's obligated for five years and it takes quite a bit of time to spend all of it. so an idea that during the couple of months in july, august and september 11th -- 55 to 48 days, depending on how you count this, this was somehow denying critical assistance to the ukrainians on the front line is not true. and because house managers say no, it was a signal to the russians, signal that the russians would pick up on. but here again it's critical. even the ukrainians didn't know that the aid had been paused. and part of the reason was they never brought it up in any conversations with representatives of the u.s. government. and as ambassador volker testified, representatives of the u.s. government didn't bring it up because they didn't want anyone to know. they didn't want to put out any signal perceive fwhied russians or ukrainians as any sign of lack of support. it was kept in

ambassador yovanovitch under secretary of state david hale an email detailing the concerns and askingent of concern from the state department. in reply, the state department told her that they were unwilling to help her, their own ambassador, because if they had issued a public statement supporting her, it could be, quote, undermined, by the president, end quote, and they were concerned that the rug could be pulled out from underneath the state department. the state department cannot express support for the american ambassador threatened abroad, because they are concerned that if they express concern for that 5 ambassador the rug is going to be pulled out from underneath them by the president. what it must have taken to convince the state department to refuse to support the ambassador. phone records show that giuliani also kept the white house apprised of the developments. as you can see from these slides. again, it is worth remembering that smearing ambassador yovanovitch was a means to the end. removing her would allow the president's allies the freedom to pressure ukraine to announ

brief pause on the aid was not significant, and under secretary of state for political affairs, david haleuture assistance, and i mentioned this the other day. it's not like this money is being spent month by month to supply current needs in the ukraine. it's five-year money. once it is obligated, it can go to u.s. firms who are providing material to the ukrainians, and it doesn't get spent down finally and materials shipped to ukraine for a long time, so a delay of 48 or 55 days depending on how you count it and the money being released before the end of the fiscal year ends up having no real effect. it's not current money that's supplying immediate needs, despite what we've heard about the idea that on the front lines in the don bas ukrainian soldiers are being put at risk. we know also from the ukrainian deputy minister of defense who gave an interview to the "new york times" and explained that the hold came and went so quickly that he didn't even notice any change. and remember, the ukrainians didn't even know, president zelensky and his advisers, yermak and others have made it abundan

deputy assistant secretary of defense for russia, ukraine and eurasia, and the same thing, and david halelled by the house, and you saw his testimony, and we never had the opportunity to cross examine, and if we have witnesses, we have to have the opportunity to do that. there were other witnesses that were called or you saw their testimony or heard their testimony or what was referred to as catherine croft, and mark sandy, the deputy secretary for national security programs and christopher adams, and you have heard their testimony referred to, and we did not have the opportunity to cross-examine them. so this is not going to happen if the witnesses are called in a week. now, that is just the witnesses that have been produced that you have seen by the house managers. you are being called upon to make consequential constitutional decisions. consequential decisions. for our constitution. we talk about the burden of proof, and i have said it and i will say it again, the managers said they proved the case 29 times that the evidence is overwhelming, and manager nadler he didn't even say it is

hale. sergeant matthew westman, sergeant first class terry wallace, sergeant ray testers, lance corporal derek column, staff sergeant brian lewis, sergeant julian atkins, sergeant william part ridge, corporal davidtewart. mr. mccaul: i yield an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: an additional 30 seconds is granted. mr. abraham: sergeant david murray, first sergeant michael borderla, sergeant nicholas olver, sergeant seth trahan, staff sergeant jonathan reed, staff sergeant christopher ramsey. sergeant michael evans, sergeant robert sweeney, staff sergeant william manual. mr. chairman, i -- i request unanimous consent to enter the rest of my testimony into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i now yield one minute to a valued member of the foreign affairs committee, the gentlewoman from pennsylvania, ms. huell hab -- ms. houlahan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. huelskamp: thank you, mr. chair -- ms. houlahan: thank you, mr. chair. i rise in support of the resolution before us today. article 1, section 8 of the constitution states,

hale. sergeant matthew westman, sergeant first class terry wallace, sergeant ray testers, lance corporal derek column, staff sergeant brian lewis, sergeant julian atkins, sergeant william part ridge, corporal davidwart. mr. mccaul: i yield an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: an additional 30 seconds is granted. mr. abraham: sergeant david murray, first sergeant michael borderla, sergeant nicholas olver, sergeant seth trahan, staff sergeant jonathan reed, staff sergeant christopher ramsey. sergeant michael evans, sergeant robert sweeney, staff sergeant william manual. mr. chairman, i -- i request unanimous consent to enter the rest of my testimony into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i now yield one minute to a valued member of the foreign affairs committee, the gentlewoman from pennsylvania, ms. huell hab -- ms. houlahan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. huelskamp: thank you, mr. chair -- ms. houlahan: thank you, mr. chair. i rise in support of the resolution before us today. article 1, section 8 of the constitution states, q