these 2 individuals you know with hindsight and what we learned later looking to open up a new energy company exporting liquefied national gas natural gas to ukraine. never actually came to the embassy which is unusual because that would usually be a 1st stop going to the american chamber of commerce going to the u.s. embassy get the lay of the land see how we could provide assistance. and was that source of frustration ever express to you or did you just learn that separately. source of frustration. on whose part on firm in part us. i don't know that they were frustrated and i mean i of her straight away well you mentioned that there were there business interests and you know i asked you whether you had been stymied by anything in particular that you had advocated for or your road blocked to them being successful i wondered if there was any connection i had never met them when when i heard those names for the 1st time which was in february of 2019 i asked my team the econ in the commercial sections are the ones who would usually meet with american businessmen and women and nobody had

in hindsight, i would have done that. but that's after watching the game in hindsight.al victory against the all blacks up there in your top four victories. do you think you can bloat of at that and perhaps it skewed you are thinking, going into the final the springboks? that's probably right. the difficulty is you need to be at your best to beat new zealand. if you are not at your best, you don't get to the final. so we had to be at our best. the challenge was, could we get close to oui’ challenge was, could we get close to our best next week? it was always going to be difficult to replicate that fully. because of human nature. i think we did everything we could to be at our best. we were just a little bit off. it is four years ago this week that you arrived slightly dishevelled at heathrow after being tempted into the england job. where do you think england were and where are they now? they were obviously at are they now? they were obviously at a real low after the last world cup on home soil. we have gone from a tea m on home soil. we have gone from a team that could

those two words were foresight and hindsight. his legal team depended on them, with lashings of repetition of his post—traumatic stress disorder being used as a tool for is catch. the qc invited the jurors to look at the state of him during his summing up. even when family members and survivors of hillsborough were sitting in preston crown court, showing them remarkable courage. 30 years later to the jury. i refer to... the jury what advised that duckenfield may to... the jury what advised that ducke nfield may not to... the jury what advised that duckenfield may not show any emotion during the evidence, favour never given or shown by families, giving evidence, knowing only too well about post medic stress disorder. foresight and high side are both wonderful things. yet, a majority of mr duncan to's evidence... also, at the inquest into thousand 16, again, they heavily relied on duckenfield. this time using hindsight along with the passage of time. at the resulting inquest, the qc offered various points of failure to duckenfield,

. >> and in hindsight did you wish that he had come to you first before going to the lawyers? >> yes. >> and why is that? >> well if he had concerns about something about the content of the call, that is something that i would have expected to be 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. >> okay. at any point subsequently did he feel frustrated that he was cut out of some of the ukraine portfolio. >> yes. >> and what was the nature of his concerns? >> well, he -- the easiest way to say it is he was concerned that he was not -- he did not ip go. he asked me why it is my practice to have a number of the conversations with ambassador taylor one-on-one. and there were certain other matters. >> okay. and did you ever get the sense that you resolved his concerns or did they linger? >> i -- i explained to him my thinking and that was that. >> okay. before my time expires, ambassador volker, i want to turn quickly to the -- what ambassador taylor describes as the

think oh boy i was sure unlucky that i didn't have all these that come their way and then in hindsight i think oh boy i was sure unlucky that i didn't have all these good things happen to me that you had happen to you that's not luck it's good things happen to me that you had happen to you that's not luck it's in it's in a way it's a self-fulfilling prophecy ok one of 3 things are and it's in a way it's a self-fulfilling prophecy ok one of 3 things are doing in that sense and enough flat imagination altering that sense and enough has played a mention ation or a scope for a reality when they can drink dreams dreams are a scope for reality when they can drink dreams dreams are still dreams are super interesting ok so just bigger picture we all have to sleep every night or sed dreams are super interesting ok so just bigger picture we all have to sleep every night 8 hours you've got to get 8 hours super important a good portion 8 hours you've got to get 8 hours super important a good portion of that 8 hours is going to be spent in rem sleep r.e.m. rapid eye movement sleep this is about 8 h

these two individuals, with hindsight and what we learned later, looking to open up a new energy company exporting liquefied natural gas to the ukraine, never actually came to the embassy. which is unusual, because that would usually be a first stop. going to be american chamber of commerce, going to the u.s. embassy, get the lay of the land, see how we can provide assistance. >> was that a source of frustration ever express to you, or did you learn that separately? >> source of frustration, what do you mean? on whose part? >> on fruman and parnas. >> i don't know that they were frustrated. frustrated by what? >> you mentioned they had business interests. i ask you whether they had been stymied by anything in particular that you had advocated for, or that you were a roadblock to them being successful. i wondered if there was any connection. >> i had never met them. when i heard those names for the first time, which was in february of 2019, i asked my team, the econ and commercial sections would usually meet with american businessma businessmen. nobody had heard of them. so all i could co

and more opportunities for them to take advantage of and then in hindsight they look back and go boy was i ever lucky i went to that party i met this person and we got married i mean look back and go boy was i ever lucky i went to that party i met this person and we got married and i met this person and got this job interview and this changed my life i had this career i had a great family that this person got this job interview and this changed my life i had this career i had a great family whatever. unlikely people tend to be. introverts whatever. unlikely people tend to be. introverted and they score low in openness to experience they don't like travel they don't like new environment and they score low in openness to experience they don't like travel they don't like new environments they don't like to go to parties they don't like to talk to people so they're less likely to have opportunities they don't like to go to parties they don't like to talk to people so they're less likely to have opportunities that come their way and then in hindsight think oh boy i was sure unlucky that i

and yes, we had discussions in the state department about this. >> in hindsight do you think you did enough inside the state department to alert them to this mounting campaign against you? >> i did what i could. >> and what was that? >> reached out to the -- umm, the european bureau. you've also heard that dr. fiona hill was aware of this as well. so the nsc. and they had other discussions with more senior people. >> okay. and did you get any feedback from your chain of command? did you engage ambassador reeker, undersecretary hale? >> yes. >> did you develop sort of a game plan to push back against these allegations? >> so, i mean, there are different time frames here that we're talking about. so fast forwarding to march, i did, when undersecretary hale asked whether i would consider extending, i did raise, because i wasn't sure that he was aware of it, i wanted to make sure that he knew that mayor giuliani had been out there saying things about me, untrue things, and i wanted him to be aware of that. he said he understood, he still was hoping that i could extend for another year. s

hindsight is cruel. hindsight is very cruel. that's the toughest thing to cope with, isn't it?hare that people think that the worst day of my life was the day that she died and i always say, no, it's the day before. it was the day before. there's a million things you wish you'd done differently. ijust think it wasn't in the forefront of my mind, like, when i think about it, it isjust if i could stress to parents, it's. .. you just don't know what you don't know. it'sjust, you don't know, and everybody likes to say, not my kid, not my kid, my kid would never... my kid would never... and i think the studies show that we are all so wrong. but please, just for me, will you put your hands up if you will promise me you will always remember to look after yourself and your friends whenever possible? that's a great comfort. thank you very much. molly looked up things on the internet about being depressed and being anxious, so anxiety, depression and being sad, to try and find an answer. i think it's bad when people use it in the wrong way and use it for cyber bullying when that is not w

but they are all signs that with the benefit of hindsight you wished that you had just talked a littlehat there were a handful of tiny signs that when we look back with hindsight, all the little clues line—up now they look quite a positive clue. at the time, there were big gaps between them and each isolated thing was very hard to spot. do you talk to your parents about how you're feeling? all the time? or do you keep to yourselves share with friends? i would not say i keep it to myself necessarily, but not all the time. it is one of those things, when someone says how are you doing? and you just say i'm fine. it is almost like a... you want to say i'm fine, that is a normal thing to say. one of the things we think we should have done as a family, instead of saying, "are you ok, molly?" we should have said "what's wrong?" if we thought she was a bit more quiet than normal, because that might encourage her to stay well, actually, i am having a bad day today. was there any point you were like that is not like her? or was itjust a shock? the worst point, which is huge again when we look b

and your forthright testimony, you've testified -- and it's really with the benefit of hindsight because you couldn't piece it all together. giuliani knew in realtime what you were trying to figure out as you went along. is that a fair statement? >> i think so. one you testified that you acted on the orders of the president. that was you acting on his orders, correct? >> correct. and you said, quite explicitly, there was a quid pro quo relating to the -- >> relating to the meeting and the burisma d.n.c. -- >> that's exactly right. no meeting unless there's an investigation, right? >> that's what we were told by from giuliani. >> all right, and mr. giuliani, you -- >> wait. no meeting unless there was an announcement of investigation. >> okay. thank you. and i asked -- by the way, did the efforts of mr. giuliani authorized by the president impede the efforts that you and others were making to try toed a vans what you thought was that ukraine policy? >> not initially. we were just working toward -- >> ultimately? well, ultimately, nothing happened. >> right. and giuliani was the one who wa

but as you have been involved and with the benefit of hindsight, while you were working on what you thought was stopping aggression and eliminating corruption, there was a side deal here to get investigations going, correct? >> so yes. so my oive wbjective was purelys on support for ukraine. and i've learned through other time about the president's statement about investigating biden and other conversations i did not know about. >> thank you for that and thank you for your candor about vice president biden's integrity and service. but the bottom line here is at the end of the day we're going to have to make a judgment what the president was up to with respect to a request for a favor and how it repudiated the policy that was the bipartisan effort in ukraine and raises questions about he in the hypothetical example i gave of the mayor, held himself to be above the law. i yield back. >> mr. maloney. >> gentlemen, thank you for being here. ambassador volker, i was struck by your opening statement, moved a long way from the testimony you presented to us in october. and i know you gave a reason

, yes. >> with hindsight. on the day after the president's famous call coming to having lunch with david holmes. we have covered this. he overhears your conversation and i know you said you have no reason to dispute what mr. holmes said and i think you said you wouldn't have any reason to think he didn't speak about investigations. the president raised investigations with you on the 26th. >> correct. >> we know that it was about the bidens and the burisma and 2016. i know you didn't know that at the time, that's your testimony. mr. holmes said you said bidens after that but you don't recall it. do you dispute it? >> i do. >> but you don't recall it. you do confirm that he wanted to talk about investigations. >> with the complete picture, what he said 24 hours before, yes. >> you said it's wrong to investigate political opponents. we have agreed on that today. >> he has. >> yet that's what we know the president was asking for. let me ask, who would have benefited from an investigation of the president's politic

yes one hindsight the whole year led up to it but the weeks before saw those key demonstrations in the city of light think on the 9th of october where 70000 people defied well actually their own fear of the orth or a tease peacefully went to the streets there was no violence either from the protesters nor was a bullet fired or any kind of violence from the side of the police the former communist regime simply overwhelmed with the situation at a loss of what to do that is seen as a key moment that an able to this peace for revolution then you saw on the 18th you saw hanukah standing down as leader of east germany and on the 4th of november there were more than a 1000000 people just 5 minutes down the road from here on alexanderplatz in the east with this large demonstration on alexanderplatz with speakers from the communist regime vowing to change that change was possible within that structure and nobody there had any inkling that only 5 days later the war would fall so coming today here we are now in the united germany there are still political divisions between the former east and wes

at the end of the day, with the benefit of all of the hindsight that one could have, it was definitelywas the honourable and right thing to do. the general verdict was that the prince had done himself no favours in what many considered to be a pr disaster newsnight was widely praised for its coup with some tweeting this: but others raised objections with mike 0wens declaring: margaret eales echoed that. and richard spooner pleaded: if one of newsnight‘s aims was to set the news agenda, that was certainly achieved, with the duke of york remaining in the

so as i said it was a huge marketing stunt last week took everyone by surprise and now i wish to hindsight us with a couple of based. the good news remain well bringing bring a good industry chops into 40 should number into a region close too close to the german capital that is good news and i think also off the many discussions in the industry electrum ability doesn't need us need to push it need to come it to people smites and if if a strong well the leading brand intellect is coming to cheer many it's bringing good news that's good for all now there are concerns though about rather will abide by german law particularly when it comes to workers' protections to unions etc to the very well it's called a particular german reality when it comes to these big projects do you think this could be a major stumbling blocks when it comes to this project. i think that will be put it mildly a learning opportunity for the past that there's like culture i think we'll fall her fall read and heard the news about the workplace health and safety issues in the fremont and the arena factory so that was a spe

think oh boy i was sure unlucky that i didn't have it easy come their way and then in hindsight think oh boy i was sure unlucky that i didn't have all these good holdings and have good and think of things they haven't and to me that at but you do you have to get out but the that's not a lot that's not a lot. it's in it's in a way it's a self-fulfilling prophecy ok why not it's in a way it's a self-fulfilling prophecy ok why not bring our dreams in that sense and enough to flatten the engine ation our dreams or that sense and then ask this platinum engine ation or scope for a reality when they can drink dreams tree or a scope for reality when they can drink dreams dreams are still dreams are super interesting ok so just bigger picture we all have to sleep evans' there's dreams are super interesting ok so just bigger picture we all have to sleep every night 8 hours you've got a good 8 hours super important a good pre night 8 hours you've got a good 8 hours super important a good portion of that 8 hours is going to be spent in rem sleep r.e.m. rapid eye movement sleep or short of that 8

over the summer what they really meant was biden's right with 2020 hindsight yes right with hindsight and of course on the day after the president's famous call you're having lunch with david holmes we've covered this and he overhears your conversation and i said i know you said you have no reason to dispute what mr holmes said and i think you said you would have any reason to believe it to to think you didn't speak about investigations with the president president raised investigations with you right on the 26th correct and we now know of course that was about the biden's embarrassment 2016 right i mean i know you didn't know that at the time that your testimony but we now know that it meant to me mr holmes says you said biden's right after that but i know you don't recall that right that's correct you dispute it i did ok but you don't recall up but we know that that's what the president and right and you do you do confirm that he want to talk about investigations with you all now with the complete picture and what he said 24 hours before yesterday in sense and you said it's wrong to

volker, your written testimony in which you say in hindsight i now understand that others saw the idea of involving possible tore rupgs as equivalent to investigating former white house. the latter being unacceptable. in receipt throw spekt you said i should have seen that differently and i would have raised my own objections. that's where we appreciate your willingness to a meant your earlier testimony in light of what you now know. i think you made it clear that, in fact, the investigation of his political rival. you would not have countenanced them to continue in such conduct. i criticize you were able to debunk for the last time the idea that joe biden wrong when he in accordance sought to replace a corrupt prosecutor. something the u.s. state wanted and european union wanted it? it's united states. you didn't get a lot of guess. we appreciate your candor. ism immediately after the president met with zelensky and then sondland told you two that if he had gone down and done the 400 million in military aid, they will have to do those investigations that the president wanted. this is

>> with 20/20 hindsight, yes. >> right. with hindsight. and of course, on the day after the president's famous call, you're having lunch with david holmes. we've covered this. and he overhears your conversation. and i know you said you have no reason to dispute what mr. holmes said. and i think you said you wouldn't have any reason to believe -- to -- to think he didn't speak about investigations with the president. the president raised investigations with you, right? >> correct. >> on the 26th? >> correct. >> and we now know of course that was about the bidens and burisma and 2016, right? i mean, i know you didn't know that at the time. that's your testimony. >> i understood it meant to mean burisma. >> mr. holmes said you said bidens right after that but you don't recall that, right? >> that's correct. >> do you dispute it? >> i do. >> okay but you don't recall it but we know that's what the president meant, right? and you do confirm that he wanted to talk about investigations with you. >> well, now with the complete picture what he said

he now says that he read the report and said he would have done it with hindsight, he doesn't mean he at the time it is very sorry that he gave the impression that he did not think there is sensible people. he did give that impression it was shocking, insensitive and the apologies being made of the damage has been done and certainly the family's safari made statements showing how the stress —— families have made statements. and the tone initially when trees may had a very u nfortu nate initially when trees may had a very unfortunate encounter into her credit, she worked quite hard to rebuild some of that relationship listening to the appointment of the chairman and things like that. jacob reese mogg has put some of that work backwards somewhat for the conservatives. a long way and given the impression that the conservatives are out of touch with ordinary people and think that they know better, which of course is bad. stormzy has given his characteristic style calling on him to resign. i think our audience is mature enough to handle... he will not quit but it is curious to see what rol

the trouble is it's always been clever with hindsight.e cities think that he should have never been let out, perhaps of the time you just don't know. it's very difficult to know about the big questions will be asked. on your point about the bravery, you wonder how you would react in such a circumstance, and would we be able to show the courage that these people showed? i have incredible admiration and because it's a totally new and unforeseeable experience to have that kind of courage is a set earlier one of the best things about it is it's the best things about it is it's the best answer to terrorism is to show that kind of unity of purpose for people to actually show bravery. and it helps actually in the response, so it helps actually in the response, so that's very good. 0n the issue ruth was raising but well reasoned article. it does explore the difficulties of the security services. we don't know whether the perpetrator of the atrocity today was acting alone, don't know if he was acting alone, don't know if he was part of the cell, a

around the world about the rise of authoritarianism and in battle democracies with the benefit of hindsight which you've already talked about a little what do you think we have to learn from what happened in both berlin and aging from 1909 for now i think what is really important to take away from 989 that there was this optimism and there was this holding on to certain values that everybody raised for if you look at europe and this idea of building a europe whole and free build around freedom and democracy and now that is all being questioned but the question of course is in europe do you want to live under an author terry in vain do you want to live for the russians call a pasta mr world order the new vote or that he entered in the early ninety's was that built on those values i just mentioned and of course together with the russians that was seen as universal common values. christina for thank you thank you. that's our show for today there's always more on our website d w dot com ford slash asia will leave you now with night images of the shine in kut-o. pour that will be opened she seek

in hindsight. they knew what they were doing. >> absolutely. you would have to know what you're doing. not only are there a number of steps to take, but also you have to have particularly special access to do this, and there is a record of who does this and when they do it. so that part of it could not have been a mistake. now, fred, it is plausible that mr. eisenberg may have said to someone that these transcripts need to be restricted and he was not clear in his communication. but if he was clear or not, we now know where this particular transcript that had such sensitive information was being treated differently than other transcripts. >> it was also testified by him that the potential fallout, this whole process and change of policy would become partisan if it were leaked. and he testified, you know, about really feeling rather conflicted, if you will, on that and worried and feeling like something, while it may not have been illegal, he testified, he did feel like something was wrong. how pote

though in hindsight it might have been a good idea.u look at what the witnesses are doing next week with the lies and innuendos. ambassador yovanovich was caught in a lie by lee zeldin. this person needs to be referred to the department of justice for lying under oath. we need to not hear from this ambassador next week because her credibility is in question. james carville, when i was doing this in the 1990s. they were defending bill clinton and were on offense every single day. they had a scorched earth policy. if you lifted your head up against bill clinton, you became a victim. we need to have that -- this is a fight for the future of america. gregg: a guy came up to me at the train station. he said i pulled up the transcript online. can you tell me what's wrong with it? i think americans are pretty smart. they will get around to reading the transcript. stay with us. we'll be right back with more. here's to the straggly ones. the first ones. the 'hey', i look good with this' ones. the black, brown, red, and grey ones. the itchy ones

and yes, we had discussions in the state department about this. >> in hindsight, do you think you did enough inside the state department to alert them to this mounting campaign against you? >> i did what i could. >> and what was that? european out to the bureau, i think you've also heard that dr. fiona hill was aware of this as well, the n.f.c., and they had other discussions with more senior people. >> ok. did you get any feedback from your chain of command? did you engage ambassador reeker, undersecretary hale? >> yes. >> did you develop a game plan to push back against the allegations? >> there are different time frames we are talking about. fast forwarding to march, i did, when undersecretary hale asked whether i'd consider extending i did raise, because i wasn't sure he was aware of it, i wanted to make sure that he knew that mayor giuliani had been out there saying things about me. untrue things. and i wanted him to be aware of that. he said he understood. he still was hoping that i could extend for another year. so that was early march. fast forward to late march and izabeth se

he comes in today and says in hindsig hindsight, i was wrong. burisma meant biden and if i had known it meant biden -- >> how could he not know? >> that's a great question. >> at the end of the day i asked him, gee, you missed it on about a half what dozen different occasions but we appreciate him coming in now saying in hindsight having heard all the testimony -- look, it was giuliani feeding these things to him to change the statement that the ukrainian president was supposed to say. point being we appreciate that ambassador volker came forward and made clear what he knows it's wrong to ask for an investigation of the bidens. >> big member with volker from the other side, congressman stefanik. here's a little bit of their exchange. >> was there any reference to withholding aid? >> no. >> to bribery? >> no, to quid pro quo in. >> no, there was not. >> any reference to exextortion no, there was not. >> did your ukrainian counterparts mention the withholding of aid? >> no, they did not. >> any quid pro quo. >> no, they did not. >> did they mentio

muilenburg is, in hindsight, when should you have ground this plane? >> congresswoman, we have asked ourselves that question many many times, if we knew back than what we know now, we would the ground it right after first accident, we could save one life we would not have done it. that is, what we would have done. >> mister muilenburg i spent the last four years a in my life in business as the head of a fortune 500 company i've seen touch decisions firsthand from the inside there's a lot of conversation today about the compensation, earlier this afternoon you have indicated it's up to the board of directors. i pulled up the proxy statement from 20 nay 19, and did a little back of the envelope calculation what i want to make sure is that people, who loved those who dive sitting in this room today, are short by you, that boeing executives, who now regret not acting in making those decisions, understanding the pain they're going through, my back of the envelope calculations is on the number of underlying stock options and you still have, is that just in s

. >> you don't, but as you have been involved with the benefit of hindsight, while you were working on what you thought was stopping aggression and ending -- eliminating corruption, there was a side deal here to get investigations going, correct? >> my objective was purely focused on support for ukraine. national security, and i now have learned throughout their testimony about the president's statement about investigating biden and other conversations that i did not know about. >> thank you for that and thank you for your candor about vice president biden's integrity and service. up at the bottom line here is at the end of the day, we are going to have to make a judgment about what the president was up to, the request for a favor, and how it repudiated the policy that was the bipartisan effort of ukraine and raises questions about the hypothetical example i gave of the mayor, held himself to be above the law. i yield back. >> mr. maloney. >> gentlemen, thank you for being here. ambassador volker, i am struck by your opening statement. he moved a long way from the testimony you present

now, hindsight is 20-20, but as crime continued to come down as we reduced stops and continued to come down during the next administration to its credit i now see we could and should have acted sooner and acted faster to cut the stop. i wish we had, and i'm sorry that we didn't. >> and now we have mr. mayor de blasio here with us. thank you for coming on in. first, i just want to get your reaction to this apology today. do you believe it was sincere? >> ana, you know, i'm looking at that and i just have to say people aren't stupid. they can figure out if someone is honestly addressing an issue or whether they're acting out of convenience. for years so many of us said when he was mayor of new york city this is hurting people, this is creating division. it's creating a rift between our police and our community. and we said, in fact, if our police and our community cannot have a partnership we're going to be less safe. lo and behold when i came into office we absolutely abolished the approach michael bloomberg had taken to stop and frisk. the city has gotten safer six years in a row, and

were these inhates hindsight is is always 2020. we're looking at if they hoed i location or not. >> on the loose, both 19 years old. bout us is expected gang members are considered dangerous. >> both men are from salinas where their alleged crimes occurred but they say they could be anywhere by now. at this point, investigators are looking for two men but they'll make more arrests if they finds someone helped them in or outside of jail. this man says he thinks everyone is in danger because of those two men. not only do they want the suspects caught. they want someone to assure them this will never happen again. >> reporter: the crews are making repairs and the sheriff is offering a $5,000 reward for their capture. live in salinas. >>> a mother in the south bay is accused of killing her gilroy received a 911 call yesterday morning from a woman who said she just drowned her child in the bathtub. when police arrived at the home they discovered the body of that toddler. officers say they found the mother a short time later out on the s

well, his temperament has been fine and i think his responses have generally been good should he in hindsight have forgone the last year's income rate rise, could we have been -- some people would not want to -- one more rate increase more or less isn't going to determine whether he's doing a good job as long as he respond to the data and as long as he keeps himself insulated from the political pressures. i wish the political precious weren't there but i commend him for resisting it and although the institutions are being attacked, the institutions are holding up >> let me ask you about the company you use to run, goldman sacks. how do you think david solmomon is doing >> i'm not going to comment. i'm a good leaver. by the way, i will say i know who played the biggest role in putting him in that job and that was me so i'll take credit for that but i'm not going to comment on what he's doing after i left >> let me ask you this way then. there's a new article, i don't know if you saw it in "fortune" magazine, "knocking down walls at goldman sachs." the implication is goldman's growth had slowed

at the end of the day, um, with the benefit of all the hindsight that one can have, um, it was definitelyng to do. um, but, at the time, i felt it was the honourable and right thing to do. and i...i admit fully that...that...that...that my... ..judgment was probably coloured by my... um, tendency to be too honourable, but that's just the way it is. and then, there's andrew's alleged friendship with the then 17—year—old virginia roberts, who was on epstein‘s payroll. she's alleged that andrew seduced her. she says she met you in 2001, she says she dined with you, danced with you at tramp nightclub in london. she went on to have sex with you in a house in belgravia belonging to ghislaine maxwell, your friend. your response? i have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever. you don't remember meeting her? no. it was in 2001, according to virginia roberts, that she had sex with andrew on three occasions, including one orgy. the palace has denied that. in 2008, epstein was convicted of procuring for prostitution a girl under the age of 18. he was sentenced to 18 months in pris

brad: in hindsight, i look back and laugh at myself and am slightly amazed that i did what i did.re was one law firm that i wanted to work at, i got the offer from that law firm and then i turned around and said thank you very much, but i won't come work with you at your firm unless she will give me a personal computer. this was 1986. people looked at me a little bit quizzically. why do you want a pc? we have secretaries that do these things. i have a software program i loved, it was called microsoft word, version 1.0. if i can have that on my desk, and thankfully, the firm's management committee, it took them to do it, said i could come work there and have my own pc. tom: i want to hear little more about how you went from that firm to microsoft. brad: i was a longer first in washington and i was in the new london office and spent four years there. 1993 when a point in the chief international council at microsoft came to me and said we would like you to move from london to paris and take a job at the company and lead our european legal and corporate affairs team. i thought about i

in height -- is better in hindsight people were fronting a selloff in equities by getting into gold yieldsack,and again, peaking looking under the hood of the market. a lot of days when it's really a trade war related selloff, you will see china centric and u.s. stocks, you will see them underperform by the 80 to 150 basis points. right now the extent of that underperformance is about 50 basis points. so far it looks like one of these excuses to have a bit of a healthy pullback and a reset in stocks after they'd been overbought. vonnie: it's almost as if the market was waiting for something to come out of the hong kong demonstrations though. they've been getting worse and today --t china overnight with some pretty threatening talks. luke: the best commentary i've heard from this came from credit suisse on the open, saying it might be very possible for china to divorce the hong kong u.s. political aspect from the trade aspect just because there is bipartisan support against what they are doing or might be doing or might escalate in hong kong. so it really doesn't strengthen their hand or ch

but we appreciate him coming in now saying having looked in hindsight. it was giuliani feeding these things to him to change the statement that the ukrainian president was supposed to say. point being we appreciate ambassador volker came forward and made clear he knows it's wrong to ask for investigation into bidens. >> big moment for volker. on the other side congressman stephonic, here's a little bit of their exchange. >> was there reference to withholding aid? >> no, there was not. >> any reference to bribery? >> no there was not. >> any reference to quid pro quo? >> no there was not. >> any reference to extortion. >> no there was not. >> and i presume you got feedback from your ukrainian counterparts d. they mention the withholding of aid? >> no. >> did they mention any quid pro quo? >> no, they did not. >> did they mention bribery? >> no, they did not. >> and the day after the call, you met with president zelenski on july 26th. and in that meeting he made no mention of quid pro quo. >> no. >> he made no mention of withholding the aid. >> no. >> he m

in hindsight i now understand that others saw the idea of investigating possible corruption involving the ukrainian company, burisma, as equivalent to investigating former vice president biden. i saw them as very different, the former being appropriated unremarkable, the latter being unacceptable. in retrospect i should have seen that connection differently and had i done so i would've raised my own objections. does that sum up your views as well? >> it does. >> i think you are asked a question with a bit of an incorrect premise by my colleagues in the minority, fiona hill, saying that referring to a drug deal between you and mr. mulvaney. it was mr. bolton that made the comment that he didn't want to be part of any drug deal that ambassador sondland and mulvaney were kicking up. no one thinks they are talking about a literal drug deal, or a drug cocktail. the import i think of investors comments are quite clear that he believed that this bargain come of this quid pro quo as you describe it over a meeting, the investigations to get the meeting was not something he wanted to be a part

in hindsight, i now understand that others saw the idea of investigating possible corruption with the ukrainian company burisma as equivalent to investigating former president biden. i saw them as being different, the former being unremarkable, the latter being unacceptable. i should have seen it differently and had i done so, i would have raised my own objections. does that sumse up your views a well? >> it does.t >> now, i think you were asked the question with a bit of an correcting premise by my colleagues in the minority about fiona hill, referring to a drug deal between you and mr. mulvaney. it was ambassador bolton who made the comment that he didn't want to be part of any drug deal that ambassador sondland and mulvaney were cooking up. no one thinks they're talking about a literal drug deal here or a drug cocktail. the import of the ambassador's comments is quite clear, he believed this quid pro quo, as you described it, of investigations to get the not something he wantedme to be a part of. what i wanted to ask you about is, he makes reference in that drug dealef to a drug de

. >> in n hindsight, i now understand that t others sawaw e ideas of investigating burisma as equivalent to investigating former president -- former vice president biden. i should have seen that connection differently. had i done so, i would have raraised my own objections. amy: we will get the latest on the impeachment hearings. then to iran where security foforces have kikilled over r 10 protesters. and we marark trans remembrance day, a day that honors the thousands of transgender and gender nonconforming people who have been killed around the world. all that and more, coming up. welcome to democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. army lt. col. alex vindman testified in a televised house impeachment hearing over whether president trump withheld military aid from ukraine to pressure the ukrainian president to investigate trump political rival joe biden and his son. among his statements, then men said he could not believe what he was hearing when he listened to his july 25 phone call between president trump and ukrainian president zelensky. during the

at the end of the day, with the benefit of all the hindsight that one could have, it was definitely theas the honourable and right thing to do. and i admit fully that myjudgment was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable. but that's just the way it is. because during that time, those few days, witnesses say they saw many young girls coming and going at the time. there is video footage of epstein accompanied by young girls, and you were there staying in his house catching up with friends. i never... i mean, if they were, then i wasn't a party to any of that. i never saw them. i mean, you have to understand that his house, i described it more as a, almost as a railway station, if you know what i mean in the sense that there were people coming in and out of that house all the time. what they were doing and why they were there, i had nothing to do with, so i'm afraid i can't make any comment on that, because i really don't know. another guest was john brockman, the literary agent. really? now, he described seeing you there getting a foot massage from a young russian woman. di