next, the senate foreign relations committee considers the nomination of john sullivan to the u.s. -- to be u.s. ambassador to russia. he currently serves as ticket terry -- deputy secretary of state. he was asked several questions about president trump's communication with the president of ukraine in july. and alleged efforts to have

i think john sullivan and his family for being wheeling to step forward to take on this challenge. >> thank you thanks to both of you senator sullivan i know you have a commitment. >> i am a commitment also. >> you do. glad to have you. >> i want to thank all of you again for coming and john welcome we are going to hunt up like today of the honorable john sullivan to be the united states ambassador to russia. we welcome you back to the committee. thank you for your willingness to continue surfing and what is the challenging and very important role in been here before. i have no doubt that this will be a brief hearing. my colleagues will be kind and generous with you is we go through this. senators have already given deputy secretary sullivan, introduction possibly taking a few moments to take about the importance of this position. must be agree that the u.s. relationship with russia is at a low. successive u.s. presidents of both political parties have attempted to reset the relationship only to find that the brother side is an unwilling partner. this is caused in noble part, by our v

sullivan: not to my knowledge. senator murphy: did john bolton order these individuals to coordinate with rudy giuliani in pressing for these investigations? mr. sullivan: i don't have basis to answer. i don't believe so. i don't know that he did. i have no reason to think he did. i don't have a factual basis to provide a definitive answer. senator murphy: clearly if these are people under your supervision, you didn't ask them to undertake these activities. i would imagine you would want to get to the bottom of that. so what is your understanding as to where the instructions were coming from if they weren't coming from you or the secretary of state? mr. sullivan: they are getting their instructions, ambassador taylor is getting instructions from the secretary, from me, and from our undersecretary -- senator murphy: you testified neither you nor the secretary asked them to request these specific investigations. and so where did those instructions come from? mr. sullivan: i don't know. senator murphy: have you made any attempt to find out? m

we talked about how we should resolve numerous problems in our relations taking the john sullivan head of the american delegations during negotiations on strategic cooperation with russia that was a useful conversation despite the fact that of course washington's behavior in the asia pacific region is. not officially on the g 20 agenda here and japan sergey lavrov told journalists that russia did bring this issue up a few times during his meetings with the other foreign ministers here in the. little slips in the new. season on the g. 20 agenda although the country organizing it's good for any issue during the talks i'm talking about the meetings between foreign ministers these questions are important for our dialogue with the united states europe and countries in the asia pacific region especially after washington killed off the intermediate range nuclear forces and gone back to the building of surrogate new friendship with the new japanese foreign minister mr. he's expected to come to moscow before the end of this year i mean we have a train go in japan. ok to the iraqi capital were o

interesting engagement that happened at the time, we will look at what happened at william and mary with john sullivan, who later would become a major general in the u.s. army. we won't talk about his record. he tops george washington for taking defeat from the jaws of victory. new hampshire, we are looking december 14, over 200 militia will gather in the town. the british have a garrison of six soldiers. as the men marched toward the fort, another 150 will join. now, you have at least 350-400 men going after six british soldiers. captain john cochran is in command. they get a chance to fire some cannons before the americans enter the fort. as they enter, the british will strike their colors. the americans will accept a surrender. cochran is led and does not take it by formal surrender. it does empower him to try to defend the old flag and come rushing at the troops. in altercation ensues. someone pulls out a pistol and decides to hit him over the head. otherwise, that would've been the first shot of the revolution. you have two incidents on this road to the revolution, both at salem and in new hampsh

after you return to washington the deputy secretary john sullivan asked you what you wanted to do next is that correct yes that's correct and then you met with the director general ambassador perez yes that's correct. danny identify a meaningful new assignment yes and you now serve in georgetown university as a fellow that's true and this is a rewarding position for you. i'm very grateful to be in that position after what happened today is the 2nd big hearing. for the democrats and an impeachment initiative. but we don't understand or we do understand that you you don't have a lot of facts and information relating to the the the part of this that we're we're investigating. and those are the events from may 20th up until. september 11th the release to security assistance fund secor act yes that's going so you were not part of. the delegation to the inauguration i was the day you returned you were not part of the oval office meeting may 23rd correct yes that's correct. and you were not part of the decision making relating to whether there would be a white house meeting with president slu

you know, john sullivan. carter. >> this is silly. a lot of bureaucrats whining about losing jobs.ere worrying about the foreign policy. this coup is not only corrupt but it is foreign. foreign. >> laura: babar, the testimony, clinging to that, like a life raft in a storm. that is really a key to the so-called corruption of the office of donald trump. and yet when you look at the transcript of the testimony and we will put it up on the screen. it is shocking what he doesn't know. check this out. you've never spoken to rudy giuliani, taylor was asked, no, no he replied. did anyone ever ask her to speak to rudy giuliani? taylor said. no. have you spoken to the president of the united states? i have not. you had no communications with the president of the united states? correct. and the charge of the affair with the u.s. embassy. again this is their star witness, bob. >> that is one example and another one, of course, the transcript that we see from ambassador don lind, where person doing the questioning pes him over and over and over again to admit or to speculate or to ponder whethe

next, the senate foreign relations committee considers the nomination of john sullivan to the u.s. --russia. he currently serves as ticket terry -- deputy secretary of state. he was asked several questions about president trump's communication with the president of ukraine in july.

our ambassador to ukraine trump's nominee to be ambassador of russia, deputy secretary of state john sullivan his public confirmation hearing before the senate last month. as these questions swirl, giuliani has been noticeably absent from his once frequent tv appearances.oe he has been naed by the u.s. house. tofar, he is refusi comply.r fothe pbs newshour, i'm yamiche alcindor. >> woodruff: to set the stage for this first week of public impeachment hearings, i'm here with amy walter of tok political report." she's also the host of publicdi s "politics with amy walter." and tamara keithrom npr. she also co-hosts the "npr politics podcast." and before i turn to both of you, and welcome by the way, politics monday, a little bit of late-breaking news. and we were just talking about it with yamiche and lisa, and that is the inquiry or the filing by theu acting white se chief of staff mick mul vaibee who was wanting-- mul scrainee who was wanting to join the lawsuit by white house speciallt ecurity advisor john bolton, his deputy. charles cupperman, who were questioning their being spped to subpoe

. >> and after you returned to washington, the deputy secretary, john sullivan, asked you what you wanted to do next; is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> and then you met with the director general, ambassador perez? >> yes, that's correct. >> to identify a meaningful new assignment? >> yes. >> and you now serve at georgetown university as a fellow? >> that's true. >> this is a rewarding position for you? >> i'm very grateful to be in that position after what happened. >> today is the second big hearing, um, for the democrats' impeachment initiative. but we don't understand -- or we do understand that you, you don't have a lot of facts and information relating to the part of this that we're investigating, um, and those are the events from may 20th up until, um, september 11th, to release the security assistance funds; is that correct? >> mm-hmm, yes, that's correct. >> so you were not part of the delegation to the inauguration, that was the day you returned. you were not part of the oval office meeting may 23rd, correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> and you were not part of the decis

. >> after he returned to washington, the deputy secretary john sullivan ask you what you wanted to do next. is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> and then he met with the director general, ambassador perez? >> yes, that's correct. >> to identify meaningful new assignment? >> yes. >> i do know serve at georgetown university as a fellow? >> that's true. >> and this is a rewarding position for you? >> i'm very grateful to be in that position after what happened. >> today is the second big hearing for the democrats' impeachment initiative. but we don't understand -- we do understand that you don't have a lot of facts and information relating to the part of this that we are investigating, and those are the events from may 20th up until septembe september 11th. the release of security assistance funds. is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> so you were not part of the delegation to the inauguration. that was the day he returned. you are not part of the oval office meeting, the 23rd. correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> and you were not part of the decision-making whether there wou

his own nominee for ambassador to russia john sullivan was asked about that.'s watch. >> do you think it's appropriate for the president to use his office to solicit investigations into a political opponent? >> solicits investigations into a political opponent, i don't think that would be in accord with our values. >> very clear statement there. it's wrong for the president to solicit investigations into a political opponent. do you agree? >> that's not what was happening on the phone call. even when the president said will you do me a favor, he went on to ask about crowd strike. that wasn't out joe biden. taking that out of context -- >> it's about his political opponents. the transcript clearly shows the president was asking ukrainian president to investigate his political opponents, both the democrats in 2016 and joe biden going forward. do you think that was appropriate? >> that wasn't about political opponents. the law requires president trump or any president when they're sending foreign aid, tax payer money to ensure the country is rooting out corruptio

here, we see general john sullivan from my hometown of durham as a future governor of the state of new hampshire, he is exactly the kind of people the people of walpole didn't like. here is an engraving of fort smith on the new hampshire seacoast from 1780. a lot of this is about local state politics, and that really matters. it mattered to the people of walpole, but the walpole tax riot was also the product of what, by late 1782, what was a five years of constant institution in the british empire with far-reaching consequences for britain, ireland, and america. the trigger for the transformation was parliament's stunning offer to congress in 1778, to give up the fiscal supremacy that it had long claimed over the american colonies, and to move toward a commonwealth and federal model of imperial governance. as the people of walpole new, parliament had made this concession to regain the initiative after the surrender of general bergoin's army in 1777. that was a battle in which general bellows had been present, there walpole their walpole man serving in saratoga with the forces. the defe

here we see general john sullivan from my hometown of durham. he is exactly the kind of people that he did not like. on the newengraving hampshire seacoast from 1780. a lot of this is about local state politics. that really matters. right was also the about fivewhat was years of constitutional innovation within the british empire with far-reaching consequences for britain, ireland and america. the trigger for this a stunningion was offer to congress in 1778 to give up the fiscal supremacy that it long claimed over the american colonies. as the people knew, parliament admitted this concession to thein the initiative after battle of saratoga in 1977. --t was a battle . to set the stage for the alliance that france concluded with united states in year.ry of the next france came to the letter states of them formally aligning with the u.s. and the czech republic which entered the war in 1780. by the time britain suffered its yorktown,at defeat at the war of the american revolution had become a world war with fighting in europe, india, africa. with th

quote thatto be a says -- john sullivan is the author of the article. fades,ing collusion ukrainian plot develops. if i could go to another tweet four days later, this is the president son, donald trump, jr. who tweets -- we need more at richard grinnell's, the ambassador to germany, and less of these jokers as ambassadors and it is a retweet of one of john solomon's articles or an article referencing the allegations that says -- calls grow to remove obama's ambassador to ukraine. were you aware of these tweets at the time? amb. yovanovich: yes. >> what was your reaction? amb. yovanovich: i was worried. >> what were you worried about? amb. yovanovich: that these attacks were being repeated by the president himself and his son. >> were you aware of whether they received attention on prime time television, on fox news as well? amb. yovanovich: yes, i did. >> was the allegation that you were bad mouthing president trump true? amb. yovanovich: no. >> was the allegation that you had created a do not prosecute list to give to the prosecutor general in ukraine

. >> and after you returned to washington and deputy secretary john sullivan asked you what you wanted to do next, is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> then you met with the director general, ambassador perez? >> yes, that's correct. >> did you identify a meaningful new assignment? >> yes. >> and you now serve in georgetown university as a fellow? >> that's true. >> this this is a rewarding posn for you? >> yes. i'm very grateful to be in the position after what happened. >> today is the second big hearing for the democrats impeachment initiative. we understand that you don't have a lot of facts and information relating to the part of this that we are investigating, and those of those event for may 20 up until september 11 released security assistance, is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> so you were not part of the delegation to the inauguration, the day you return. you are not part of the oval office meeting may 23, correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> and you are not part of the decision-making relating to whether there would be a a whie has me with president zelensky?

reported, including the posting of many primary source documents by veteran investigate journalist john sullivan. since the democrats switched from russia to ukraine for their impeachment crusade, sullivan is reporting on burisma, hunter biden has become inconvenient for the narrative and so the media is smearing and liabling sullivan. the publication of the hill told staff yesterday it would conduct a review of the ukraine reporting. coincidentally, the decision comes three days after a democrat on this committee told a writer that she would stop speaking to the hill it had run solman's stories. now that the reporting is a problem for the democrats, it's a problem for the media as well. i would like to submit for the record, john solomon's october 31st story about biden and election interference. i encourage viewers today to read this story and draw your own conclusions about the evidence solomon has gathered. ask unanimous consent that we put this into the record, mr. chair. >> without objection. >> the campaign by the media to discredit and disown some of their own colleagues is shocking. we

the senate foreign relations committee considers the nomination of john sullivan to be the u.s.sador to russia. then washington journal on the 40th anniversary of the iran hostage crisis. >> andrew yang is traveling to iowa to hold a townhall meeting. all of mine at c-span.org or listen with the free c-span radio app. president trump holds a campaign rally in lexington kentucky. atight on q and a, looking chief justice john roberts. a litigator in the law firm -- in separate caucus rooms, we do not serve one party or one interest. you look under the hood it is hard to do that sometimes. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. host: this week on "newsmakers," congressman mike johnson, a republican of louisiana. take for being with us. rep. johnson: thank you for having me. host: we also have scott wong, who covers capitol hill with the hill newspaper, and kathy mcmanus, also a capitol hill reporter.

senators john cornyn, dan sullivan and marsha blackburn join in the push to reauthorize the violence against women act. this is 45 minutes. >> i rise today to speak on the violence against women reauthorization act of 2019. this bill passed the house by 263-158, with 33 republicans supporting it. a week ago along with every other senate democrat i introduced a bill in the senate. people on the front lines helping these victims wrote these bills. this bill is not a democratic bill. it is not a republican bill. this bill is a survivors bill. it is written with the help of survivors who know what is needed in the real world. the bill accomplishes two things. it preserves the advancements we made during the last reauthorization in 2013 and includes certain meaningful improvements to the law. in particular there are three key elements. one, it expands jurisdiction over non-native americans for domestic violence offenses and crimes against children, elders and law enforcement. violence is a big problem on tribal land and the best way to address it is to allow the tribes to prosecute these

and when she gets back she is told by the deputy secretary of state john sullivan, a man who has just been appointed by president trump to be ambassador to russia that you didn't do anything wrong but we can't protect you anymore because the president is going to attack you. then we went into the details of what the smear campaign that came from rudy giuliani and some of his co-horts and repeated in some outlets in right wing media that she says are completely untrue. that she was badmouthing the president, that she was putting a list of protected people, do not prosecute people. she says none of that is true. perhaps the republicans will have evidence of that. we'll see. so far there has been no such evidence presented. most importantly -- i agree with bret here. the dramatic moment this wasn't just testimony about the past. this played out in realtime with the president attacking her and saying that every place where she served went bad and she was asked by adam schiff do you see that as an effort to intimidate you and other witnesses. she said i feel it is quite intimidating. it do

. >> and after you returned to washington, the deputy secretary, john sullivan, asked you what you wantedrect? >> yes, that's correct. >> and then you met with the director general, ambassador perez? >> yes, that's correct. >> to identify a meaningful new assignment? >> yes. >> and you now serve at georgetown university as a fellow? >> that's true. >> and this is a rewarding position for you? >> i'm very grateful to be in that position after what happened. >> today is the second big hearing for the democrats' impeachment initiative. but we don't understand -- we do understand that you don't have a lot of facts and information relating to the part of this that we're investigating, and those are the events from may 20th up until september 11th, the release of the security assistance funds. is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> so you were not part of the delegation to the inauguration as of the day you returned? you were not part of an oval office meeting may 23rd, correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> and you were not part of the decision making relating to whether there would be a whi

. >> and after you returned to washington and deputy secretary john sullivan asked you what you wanted to do next, is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> then you met with the director general, ambassador perez? >> yes, that's correct. >> did you identify a meaningful new assignment? >> yes. >> and you now serve in georgetown university as a fellow? >> that's true. >> this this is a rewarding posn for you? >> yes. i'm very grateful to be in the position after what happened. >> today is the second big hearing for the democrats impeachment initiative. we understand that you don't have a lot of facts and information relating to the part of this that we are investigating, and those of those event for may 20 up until september 11 released security assistance, is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> so you were not part of the delegation to the inauguration, the day you return. you are not part of the oval office meeting may 23, correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> and you are not part of the decision-making relating to whether there would be a a whie has me with president zelensky?

. >> and after you returned to washington and deputy secretary john sullivan asked you what you wanted to do next, is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> then you met with the director general, ambassador perez? >> yes, that's correct. >> did you identify a meaningful new assignment? >> yes. >> and you now serve in georgetown university as a fellow? >> that's true. >> this this is a rewarding posn for you? >> yes. i'm very grateful to be in the position after what happened. >> today is the second big hearing for the democrats impeachment initiative. we understand that you don't have a lot of facts and information relating to the part of this that we are investigating, and those of those event for may 20 up until september 11 released security assistance, is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> so you were not part of the delegation to the inauguration, the day you return. you are not part of the oval office meeting may 23, correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> and you are not part of the decision-making relating to whether there would be a a whie has me with president zelensky?

reported, including the posting of many primary source documents by veteran investigate journalist john sullivan. since the democrats switched from russia to ukraine for their impeachment crusade, sullivan is reporting on burisma, hunter biden has become inconvenient for the narrative and so the media is smearing and liabling sullivan. the publication of the hill told staff yesterday it would conduct a review of the ukraine reporting. coincidentally, the decision comes three days after a democrat on this committee told a writer that she would stop speaking to the hill it had run solman's stories. now that the reporting is a problem for the democrats, it's a problem for the media as well. i would like to submit for the record, john solomon's october 31st story about biden and election interference. i encourage viewers today to read this story and draw your own conclusions about the evidence solomon has gathered. ask unanimous consent that we put this into the record, mr. chair. >> without objection. >> the campaign by the media to discredit and disown some of their own colleagues is shocking. we

castor: and after you returned to washington, the deputy secretary, john sullivan, asked you what you wanted to do next, is that correct? yovanovitch: yes, that's correct. castor: and then you met with the director general, ambassador perez? yovanovitch: yes, that's correct. castor: to identify a meaningful new assignment? yovanovitch: yes. castor: and you now serve at georgetown university as a fellow? yovanovitch: that's true. castor: this is a rewarding position for you? yovanovitch: i'm very grateful to be in that position after what happened. castor: today is the second big hearing for the democrats' impeachment initiative. but we don't understand -- or we do understand that you -- you don't have a lot of facts and information relating to the -- the part of this that we're investigating, and those are the events from may 20th up until september 11th, the release of the security assistance funds. is that correct? yovanovitch: yes. that's correct. castor: so you were not part of the delegation to the inauguration? that was the day you returned. you were not part of the oval office

sullivan theater! we're here live tonight with editor in chief of the "the recount" john heilemann and cbs news special you watch the testimony today from capitol hill when sondland was testifying? >> yes, sir. my eyes are filled with blood biden style as evidence of how much television i have been watching today. >> stephen: okay, there's, like, two different takeaways here. one is that these were bombshells. says there right on the cover of "drudge" "bombshell! president implicated." you go across the street to fox news, the drudge is conservative, fox news says this is a big nothing burger. what do you make of it? do you think this change is anything? >> go ahead. >> you. >> i think sondland woke up this morning and had a choice, which was either plead the fifthill r purgery and bribery or go in and burn the house down. and so he was like, "i think i'm going to go burn the house down." and what happens when sondland, who was the fall guy, right? that's the guy -- >> stephen: they were going to throw him under the bus, and he showed up today like sandy bullock in "speed" just driving over everything

impossible to list all the films plays and television series featuring john lithgow but here's a sampling. on television he played dyck sullivanin the sitcom third rock from the sun. arthur mitchell and dexter and sir winston churchill and the crown. wonderful. his credits include harry in the hendersons, shrek, love is strange, the world according to dark and terms of endearment. he played disgrace late fox news ceo roger ailes in the upcoming film bombshell. i understand that's coming out in time for christmas. and hanukkah, excuse me. on the stage he has appeared in sweet success and dirty rotten scoundrels and he made his wellsite shakespeare company debut as mel bodio in 12 tonight. last year he started on broadway opposite laurie metcalf in hillary and clinton. and here are a couple things you don't know about john lithgow.he spent his childhood years in yellow springs ohio where coretta scott king babysat him. he attended harvard college and graduated with an ab magna cum laude in history and literature. in 2005 he became the first actor ever to deliver commencement speech at harvard and received an honorary doctor of a

john malcolm. so i'm here today to argue against the "new york times" versus sullivan standard. but let me start by saying this. i'm not someone who dislikes free-speech. to the contrary, the first amendment is to be celebrated. it's what separates our great nation from most of the countries on the planet. it's what prevents us from being locked up and thrown into jail when we say things that are government officials don't like. and it is what allows us to assemble here today to have this very debate about the contours of that right. but while the first amendment guarantees a free press, which is a good thing, it does not guarantee a consequence-free press, which is a bad thing. what the supreme court ultimately sanctioned, a press effectively immune from civil defamation liability, what it did when handed down the decision in new york times v. sullivan. so we've heard about this case, the sullivan case. what did the supreme court say in it? it said, to prevail in a civil case for libel, defamation, slander, a public official must show that the speaker acted with actual malice.