mr. vindman, you corrected him and said you wanted him to call you lieutenant colonel vindman. do you always go by your rank? >> i'm in uniform wearing my military rank. i just thought it was appropriate to stick with that. the attacks i've had in the press and twitter have kind of eliminated the fact that either marginalizing me as a military officer -- >> i'm just telling you that the ranking member meant no disrespect to you. >> i believe that. >> i'd like to go back to your previous testimony earlier today. much has been talked about, as we discussed, between president trump and president zelensky and the word "favor" and this being interpreted as a basis for impeachment. your interpretation of the word "favor," and i'll paraphrase, you said, in the military culture s culture asks for a favor in a request, is that considered a demand? >> when a superior makes a request, that's an order. >> so you think a demand is based on your military experience? >> i think that's correct. >> is president trump a member of the military? >> he is not. sdp >> has he ever served in the milit

vindman: mr. morrison has left the position some time ago, at least three weeks ago. >> you prepared talking points for your supervisor, correct? lt. col. vindman: at that level they do not take talking points, especially if they have expertise. the talking points are intended for national security adviser, although investor bolton did not quite require them. the next level up, the president -- >> traditionally, i am just trying to establish that you made talking points for a number of people. lt. col. vindman: correct. >> did they always use them. lt. col. vindman: no. >> is president trump known to stick to a script? lt. col. vindman: i do not believe so. >> is it odd that he did not use talking points? lt. col. vindman: it is not. >> in your deposition on page 306, you were asked about a concern about temporary holds on u.s. assistance to ukraine in the 55 day period. you testified that there were no new insurance about the anticorruption efforts and the facts on the ground did not change before

mr. vindman. inninge need to show that we are better than that as a nation. it was -- it is shameful to question their patriotism, their love o >> i was there when she said that and that came very early on as they attacks just got ctarted onolina and you got the sense that republican leadership was comg out and saying this, not to discourcoe their own mention from making tho kinds of attacks on vindman but also president him hey, don't you go down this road either. they didn't thinkhawa going to be beneficial to him or to the party to go after seone who had served his country, won a purple heart and still serving his kiffin. >> well, the psident did go down that road. e next day he was calling vindn, not by name but calling him a never trumper. this is the pition he's taken. ok, they're serving in e administrationut they're not democrats but they're never-trump earnings. that's the position he's taken with these people. robert: is there any contesting of the facts hale? offifter official, ambassador after ambassador keeps ling out what appears to have --- be

mr. vindman with appropriate judgment. >> yes, sir. >> you testified that dr. old you that she had concerns about colonel vindman's judgment, is that right? >> yes, sir. >> and you testified that colonel vindman did not always adhere to the chain of command, is that right? >> i believe so, yes, sir. >> reporter: over the weekend, the president also attacked jennifer williams, saying she should meet with the other never trumpers who i don't know and mostly never even heard of and work out a better presidential attack. >> are you engaged in a presidential attack? >> no, sir. >> ms. williams, are you a never trumper? >> not sure i know what an official definition of a never trumper. >> would you describe yourself that way? >> i would not, no. >> reporter: connecticut democrat jim heinz asked the same question. >> would you call yourself a never trumper? >> representative, i'd call myself never partisan. >> of course he's under stress. no normal human being would go and endure something like that without that. but he's got the courage of his convictions. i believe o

vindman: mr. morrison has left the position some time ago, at least three weeks ago. >> you prepared talking points for your supervisor, correct? lt. col. vindman: at that level they do not take talking points, especially if they have expertise. the talking points are intended for national security adviser, although investor bolton did not quite require them. >> traditionally, i am just trying to establish that you made talking points for a number of people. lt. col. vindman: correct. >> did they always use them. lt. col. vindman: no. >> is president trump known to stick to a script? lt. col. vindman: i do not believe so. not use odd that he did talking points? lt. col. vindman: it is not. >> in your deposition on page 306, you were asked about a concern about temporary holds on u.s. assistance to ukraine in the 55 day period. did not receive any new assurances from ukraine about anti-corruption efforts and the facts on the ground lt. col. vindman: president zelensky was sworn in on may 20, 2019. >

mr. vindman you quickly corrected him, wanted to be called lieutenant colonel vindman. do you always insist on civilians calling you by your rank? mr. stewart, representative stewart, i'm in my uniform wearing my military rank. i just thought it was appropriate to stick with that. >> i'm sure -- >> i don't believe you did. but the attacks that i've had in the press, in twitter, have kind of eliminated the fact that either marginalized me as a military officer or -- >> listen. i'm just telling you that the ranking member meant no disrespect to you. >> i believe that. >> with us to talk about all this tonight, general barry mccaffrey, four star general, heavily decorated combat veteran of vietnam and one of the ground commanders for the u.s. in the gulf war. general mccaffrey, i wanted to hear you out on this topic. wearing his dress uniform into a hearing today. though civilian garb when he works in the west wing. >> yeah, well, look, it was very moving testimony. an immigrant family, patriotic, contributing their boys to defense of the nation. as been pointed out, this f

mr. vindman, you corrected him to lieutenant colonel vindman.do you always insist onn being addressed by your rank? >> i thought -- >> i'm sure you meant no disrespect. >> i don't believe he did. but the attacks i've had in the press, in twitter, have kind of eliminated the fact that either marginalized me as a military officer or -- >> listen, i'm just telling you that the ranking member met no disrespect to you. >> i believe that. >> i would like to go back to your previous testimony earlier today. much has been talked about as we've discussed between president trump and president zelensky and the word "favor." and this being interpreted as a basis for impeachment. your interpretation of the word "favor," and i'll paraphrase you, feel free to correct me, you said in the military culture, which you and i are both familiar with, when a superior officer asks for a favor of a subordinate they will interpret that as a demand. is that a fair synopsis of what you previously stated? >> when a superior makes a request, it's an order. >> in short, you t

mr. vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistleblower. >> ranking member exlieutenant colonel vinldman, please. >> there were also attempts to call lieutenant colonel vindman's loyalty into question. the purple heart recipient came to the u.s. after a young boy after his family fled the soviet union. during the hearing he was asked about repeated job offers he had received from the director of ukraine's national security council. >> did he offered you a position of defense minute stwer the ukrainian government? >> he did. >> how many times did he do that? >> i believe it was three times. >> do you have any reason why he asked you to do that? >> i don't know, but every single time i dismissed it. upon returning, i notified my chain of command and the appropriate counter intelligence folks about the offer. >> multiple right wing conspiracy theorists including rudolph giuliani have accused you of harboring loyalty toward ukraine. they've accused of you espionage and dual loyalties. we've seen that this morning. the three minutes asking you about the offer made

mr. vindman. vindman came back and said i would prefer it if you called me lieutenant colonel vindman suggesting he obviously had earned that title as a purple heart recipient and decorated iraq veteran. >> danny i want to get your take on the opening statement first and foremost. you also tweeted that vindman's opening statement, quote, surely caused some eyes to well up among viewers. i imagine you're talking about that moment where he addressed his father. his brother was also in the room yesterday to support him. looks as if he kind of glanced at his brother as well during that moment. take me for to your reaction. >> yeah. that statement hit home. my father is an immigrant, as children of immigrants, one of the things that emerged, the republican strategy that lieutenant colonel vindman lacked loyalty is inappropriate. they can properly question his judgment as did mr. morrison. they said they testified in some senses they questioned his judgment really how good he might have been at his job.

mr. chairman. colonel vindman, let's go back to that pair of meetings on jul. about scrambled eggs office and down in the boardroom, were you witnessed ambassador sondland informed the ukrainian officials that, as a prerequisite, "ukrainians would have to deliver an investigation into the bidens." you said that ambassador sondland was "calling for an investigation that didn't exist into the bidens and burisma." is that correct? >> that is correct. >> that same afternoon he went to mr. eisenberg, correct? >> that occurred in the afternoon, and i'm sure it was a been within a couple hours i talk to mr. eisenberg. >> how did he react? >> he was cool, calm, and collected. he said he would look into it and you took notes. >> did he tell you you would be free to come back if you have additional concerns? >> he did, mr. congressman. >> ambassador sondland said his request to the ukrainians had been coordinated with the acting chief of staff, mick mulvaney. did you report that to mr. eisenberg? >> i did. >> what was his reaction? >> he took notes and he said he would f

mr. vindman who quickly corrected him and wanted to be called lieutenant colonel vindman. do always insist on can civilians calling you by your rank? >> mr. stuart, representative stuart, i'm in uniform where my military rank. i just thought it was appropriate to stick with that. >> the ranking member, no disrespect to you. >> i believe that. >> laura: well. while little neil was set in the night and half hours of witness testimony today, there was one new nugget that even shocked me. just months ago, the ukrainian officials who got to know lieutenant colonel vindman were so impressed by him, they offered him a job. >> during that trip, did mr. denny look offer you a position of defense minister with the ukrainian government? >> he did. >> and how may times did he do that? >> i believe it was three times. >> laura: third time wasn't a charm? what? okay. how is that not a showstopper? ukrainian official later said he was joking, but was it a joke all three times? how strange. imagine if the shoe were on them other foot, the narrative was a little tweaked there. democrats kne

mr. vindman, you quickly corrected him and wanted to be lieutenant colonel vindman. do you always insist on civilians calling you by your rank? >> mr. stewart -- representative stewart, i'm in uniform wearing my military rank. i just thought it was appropriate to stick with that because -- i'm sorry, mr. stewart. >> i'm sure i meant no disrespect. >> i don't believe he did. but the attacks i've had in the press and twitter have kind of eliminated the fact that either marginalized me as a military officer or -- >> listen, i'm just -- i'm just telling you the ranking member met no disrespect to you. >> i believe that. >> i would like to go back to your previous testimony earlier today. much has been talked about as we discussed between president trump and president zelensky and the word favor and this being interpreted as a basis for impeachment. your interpretation of the word favor, and feel free to correct me, you said in the military culture, which we're both familiar with, when a superior officer asks for a favorite of a subordinate, they interpret that as a demand

mr. vindman. president seemed to acknowledge that maybe point vindman this and that nunes lost something there for style points. i think clearly jordan, meadows. as if mr. radcliffe as well. he was going to come in and be dni so the president has his defenders. he likes the punlgless out there and that's certainly the ones that i've just mentioned. you get a good sense just by watching the president's twitter feed on who he's retweeting as they try to capture these moments. most of america is not going to be watching this wall to wall and the white house understands that so they're trying o create certain moments and have those drive the narrative instead of f what we just saw, which was this long testimony from two kcareer officials talking what about they saw up close. >> guys. >> hans at the white house for us. garrett on capitol hill. we're going to sneak in a break and on your screens, a picture of mr. morrison. he's expected to testify alongside ambassador kurt volcker. he was the first close

mr. vindman, we citizens can called thcan call you mr. vindmn mr. vindman.said the president did not commit any offense as far as he could tell. this is from the transcript, i would like you to do us a favor because our country has been through a lot and ukraine knows a lot about it, i would like you to find out what happened with the whole situation with ukraine, they say crowd strike, i guess you're one of your wealthy people the server they say ukraine has it, there's a lot of things that went on, the whole situation, i think your surrounding yourself with the same people. i like to have the attorney general call you or your people and i would like you to get to the bottom of it. as you saw yesterday the whole nonsense ended with the poor performance by robert mueller and a lot of it started with ukraine. whatever you can do it is very important that you do it fast. the media, anderson cooper, all of it, this is a conspiracy theory, don't bother with it, none of the democrats on the committee have wanted to look into this. not one of them. what is the pre

mr. vindman -- lieutenant colonel vindman had to say and make their own judgments. >> and we will becausehe transcripts will be released. you have your finger on the pulse of that very important state where you are right now, south carolina, in a key way. and i want to ask you about 2020. in a new poll out of iowa, places south bend mayor pete buttigieg firmly within the top four contenders. that's not the case in south carolina where he remains in low single digits. a local south carolina paper obtained a memo from inside the buttigieg campaign, detailing a focus group with black voters, some of whom didn't like that he was living with his husband and the report concluded that being gay is a barrier for these mayors. is buttigieg's struggle with black voters in your state of south carolina because he's gay? >> well, that's a generational issue. i know of a lot of people my age who feel that way. but i will say this, my own grandson, who i think is 25 years old, that guy is a big buttigieg guy, and of course he does it because he believes in the guy, not because he's gay. my grandson -- >

mr. vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistleblower >> remember, it's lieutenantolonel vindman, please. >> i - >> jimmy: wow. that's pretty embarrassing it says his name right there lit cold vegemite. [ laughter ] luckily, nunes came back, and i think he summed up the day pretty nicely. >> isn't it strange that we've morphed into the impeachment committee. presiding over a matter that has no intelligent component whatsoever >> jimmy: you hear that? so, from now on when you think of trump, i want to you think no intelligence component. [ laughter ] and with that we're out of time so let's check in on tonight's drinking game. earlier i told bill barr to take a shot every time someone incriminated me today. let's see how he is. [ light laughter ] oh, no someone go check on him. i don't have time because "the tonight show" starts right now here we go [ cheers and applause ♪ >> steve: from 30 rockefeller plaza here in new york city, it's "the tonight show starring jimmy fallon." and now, here's your host, jimmy fallon [ cheers and applause ♪ ♪ >> jimmy: thank you very

mr. vindman's interpretation of the phone call, that is apparently what he wanted corrected in the transcript and that was rejected because even "the new york times" admitted and the woesh post that what he wanted to correct had nothing to do with the ellipsies and would not have changed the fundamental understanding of lawmakers for that so that is key. many people have testified or will testify but we have literally adam schiff with zero credibility and why you give him a platform i never know. he's lied to cnn and the american people -- >> so -- >> no. he coxs out and tells us after eight or ten hours of testimony that in ten country he wants the kurn to know about. that is not the way that democracy works. they're so upset. we're in the third week anniversary this year of the biggest political upset. >> i need to move on to one other question before we run out of time. >> but why don't they admit what this is about. this is not -- >> we have a democrat on next -- >> [ overlapping speakers ] >> a reasonable person who sits across from me who i respect greatly and let's not talk about -- >>

mr. jordan. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. colonel vindman, why didn't you go after the call and why didn't you go to mr. morrison? >> i went immediately per the instructions from the july 10th incident, and i met and went immediatelymr. eisenberg, and once i expressed my concerns, it was a extremely week that we had the pcc meetings and the call to the deputy and consumed my time and i was working extremely long days. i tried to communicate, and i managed to speak to two folks in thor e n the inner agency, and speak to two other people before i received the instructions that i should not talk to anybody further. >> and so you said that you didn't go to your boss, but yo went to your lawyer, and then your lawyer told you not to go to boss? >> no, what unfolded, i had my meeting with the attorney, and i did my coordination, and i spoke to the appropriate people in the interagency and circling back around mr. eisenberg told me not the speak to anyone. >> and this is on page 102, because mr. eisenberg told me to take my concerns to him. and i sa

mr. vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistle-blower >> ranking member, it's lieutenant colonel vindman, please. i do not know who the whistle-blower is. >> how is it possible for you to name these people and then out the whistle-blower >> reporter: democrats zeroing in on one of the president's lines of defense that he was trying to root out corruption, arguing the president only mentioned investigations that would benefit him. >> so when the president says now that he held up security assistance because he was concerned about rooting out corruption in ukraine, that expressed in the two phone conversations that he had with president zelensky is that right >> correct a favor, though, before mentioning the investigations he wanted was in vindman's view a demand >> the culture i come from, the military culture, when a senior asks you to do something, even if it's polite and pleasant, it's not to be taken as a request. it's to be taken as an order. >> reporter: but republicans are defending the president, saying the aid was eventually turned over. >> one, uk

mr. vindman might not have liked it.president is watching or will he just tune it out. steve: special coverage of the congressional impeachment inquiry starts right now. ♪. bill: good morning it is now day three of the impeachment probe set to begin in the house. this will be a marathon week of public hearings, set to begin 30 men's from now. in total you will hear from nine witnesses, four of them today. two of them to be sworn in in a few moments. they're live on capitol hill. our special coverage begins now as well. bill hemmer live in new york city. we'll find out what we get today, together. sandra, nice to see you. sandra: good morning. i'm sandra smith. it's a jam-packed week. nine witnesses across three days. all facing a grilling from the house intelligence committee. four set to testify today. two in the morning. two in the afternoon. at 9:00 a.m. two officials who listened in on the ukraine call will appear together and speak publicly for the very first time. bill: so who are they? first jennifer williams, ser

mr. chairman, you took seven minutes. >> lieutenant colonel vindman, before i turn to mr. jordan i ask ms. williams about this, if she accessed without authorization fellow employees' computer systems, she answered no to the question. have you ever accessed anyone's computer system at the nsc without authorization? >> without their knowledge, no. >> knowledge or authorization? >> i'm sorry. >> knowledge or authorization, you never accessed someone's comput computer? >> correct. >> mr. jordan. >> colonel, i want to thank you for your service and sacrifice to our great country. this afternoon, your former boss mr. morrison is going to testify. i want to give you a chance, we're bringing you a copy, a chance to respond to some of things that mr. morrison said in his deposition. page 82, the transcript from mr. morrison. i had concerns about colonel vindman's judgment, among the discussions i had with dr. hill, its strengths, weaknesses, they had raised concerns about alex's judgment when mr. morrison when asked by mr. castor, bring concerns to you that colonel vindman had lea

mr. vindman knows who they blocked testimony now from -- would not allow mr. vindman to answer our questions, that whistle-blower says on july 25th that there were all these promises being made. yet, the -- forget what they call it, the drug deal that the three amigos were cooking up. were you aware of any drug deal on july 25th when the phone call actually occurred? >> i don't know about any drug deal. >> right. and do you know you're part of the three amigos? >> i am, i'm a proud part of the three amigos. >> that's the same thing that ambassador volker said yesterday. the phone call that the supposed whistle-blower claims is the original quid pro quo has now got down to we're now a month later where you're involved and their quid pro quo has gotten down to the low level of, well, they want a statement. and you didn't even know about anything to do with on july 25th, you knew nothing about military aid being withheld. >> i knew military aid was withheld beginning on july 18th when ambassador taylor told us that was the case. >> you were not on the july 25th ca

mr. vindman, you testified in your deposition you that did not though the whistle-blower. >> ranking member lieutenant colonel vindman, please >> lieutenant colonel vindman, you testified in the deposition that you did not know who the whistle-blower was i. >> i do not know who the whistle-blower is. >> how is it possible for you to name these people and then out the whistle-blower >> i just got to watch, and the republicans are absolutely killing it they are doing so well because it's a scam. >> [ inaudible question ]. >> i don't know him. i don't know ease says lieutenant colonel un what i do know is even he said that the transcript was correct. >> vindman also spoke about why he felt comfortabl against the commander in chief >> because this is america this is thd and defended, that all my brothers have served and here right matters >> for more on what we can expect today let's go to nbc's craig boswell in d.c craig, all eyes on ambassador sondland this morning. >> they certainly are. and good morning, everyone it is a critical day in the impeachment inquiry. ambassador gordon sondland is

mr. vindman, saying it is lieutenant colonel vindman.hris stewart also brought up that correction when he was later given his five minutes to talk to colonel of inman to ask questions of the witness. here is that exchange with chris stewart. [video clip] nunesn ranking member , youd you mr. vindman insisted he call you lieutenant colonel vindman. wearing myuniform military rank, i thought it was appropriate to stick with that. >> i assure you he meant no disrespect. >> i don't believe he did, but the attacks i have had in the press and twitter have eliminated the fact either marginalized me as a military officer. >> i am just telling you the ranking member meant no disrespect to you. >> i believe that. host: colonel of inman -- -- yesterdayan and in that exchange. we hope you go to c-span.org/i mpeachment to follow all of our coverage when it comes to the impeachment inquiry. you will find all the hearings we have been talking about and you will find links to documents that have been released, statements, and press conferences as well. /

mr. vindman, it's lieutenant colonel vindman.obsessed with his own rank but he doesn't seem to understand who the commander in chives and who makes foreign policy in america. the democrats' side of the committee, almost all the chairs are empty until someone comes in to ask their question. they ask their question and they leave. the democrat congressmen and women are already bored, lou. lou: they are bored and throwing away votes, i think, by the bucket load here. they are objectionable and that's one thing you don't want to be in a broadcast going hours and hours through the day. you don't want to be objectionable. they are being the most objectionable one could imagine in this. by the way, the optics of seeing a lieutenant colonel in full dress uniform talking about his commander-in-chief in deprecating tones is just about as sorry an optic as the democrats could have put forward. i think even the optics betrayed these radical dimms trying to overthrow a president. >> we have the proof that this is failing. the decision from na

mr. vindman," saying he preferred to be addressed by his military rank, lieutenant colonel. ben tracy has more tonight from the white house. >> privileged to serve elsewhere. >> reporter: at a cabinet meeting that opened with a prayer for his health... >> we ask you to give him strength and continued wisdom. >> reporter: ...president trump boasted the republicans are winning the impeachment battle. >> the republicans are absolutely killing it. >> reporter: still, mr. trump continued to seethe about the process and about the witnesses. >> all these people are talking about they heard a conversation of a conversation of another conversation that was had by the president. what is going on is a disgrace. >> reporter: the white house is dismissing lieutenant colonel alexander vindman's criticism of president trump's july phone call with ukrainian president zelensky as the personal opinion of a so-called unelected bureaucrat. >> what i do know is that even he said that the transcript was correct. >> reporter: mr. trump's appearance with his cabinet was the first time he's been see

mr. vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistle-blower. >> ranking member lieutenant colonel alexander vindman, please. >> reporter: later former special envoy to ukraine kurt volker told congress he wasn't awared investigations being demanded targeted the bidens and the 2016 elections which he casted as conspiracy theories. >> they're not things that we should be pursuing as part of our national security strategy with ukraine. >> reporter: and while this testimony was going on yesterday, president trump at the white house attacked lieutenant colonel alexander vindman in realtime seeming to undermine his military service and said he'd never seen him before. kenneth, janai. >> all right, megan, thank you. abc news' live coverage of the impeachment hearings will resume at 9:00 a.m. eastern on air and online. >>> and we're following two breakings story at this hour. the first overseas where two american service members have been killed in a helicopter crash in afghanistan. the taliban claims it shot down a chinook helicopter, but u.s. officials say there's no

mr. vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistle-blower. >> ranking member, it's lieutenant colonel vindman, please. >> lieutenant colonel vindman, you testified in the deposition, that you did not know who the whistle-blower was or is. >> i do not know who the whistle-blower is. >> reporter: at the white house, the president attacked vindman in real-time, seeming to undermine his military service. >> i don't know him, as he says lieutenant colonel, i understand somebody had the misfortune of calling him mister and he corrected them. i never saw the man, i understand now he wears his uniform when he goes in. i don't know vindman at all. >> reporter: republicans joining in, questioning why the active duty soldier was wearing his uniform. >> lieutenant colonel vindman, i see you are wearing your dress uniform, knowing that's not the uniform of the day, you normally wear a suit to the white house. >> reporter: republicans also seized on a new storyline, noting that on three occasions, ukrainian officials asked vindman to be their defense minister. vindman says

this is mr vindman describing how the ambassador brought up investigating the bidens in a meeting withfficials. we fully anticipate the ukrainians would raise the issue of a meeting between the presidents. the ambassador cut the meeting short when sondland started to speak about their requirement that ukraine delivered specific investigations to secure the meeting with president trump. following this meeting, there was a short debriefing during which the ambassador sondland emphasised the importance of delivering ukraine delivering the investigations to the 2016 elections, and biden. i stated to ambassador sondland that this was an meant nothing to do with national security. and here is ambassador volker‘s view on that meeting. as i remember, the meeting was essentially over when ambassador sondland made a comment about investigations. i think all of us thought it was an appropriate, the conversation did not continue and the meeting concluded. later on, i may have been engaged in a side conversation or had already left the complex because i do not recall further discussion regarding in

mr. vindman. that followed an opening statement where he said to his father, dad, it's safe to tell the truth here. the second flash point, devin nunes seemingly trying to out the whistle-blower with a line of questioning there. claire, what stood out to you this morning? >> i think, once again, the witnesses have been called clearly are not political. i mean, for gosh sakes, this woman worked as a field -- in the field for bush/cheney running for president and then found her way into the foreign service from a clearly political beginning of her career, so any attempts to couch these witnesses and how powerful was that opening statement of lieutenant colonel when he said in russia, if i were in russia and speaking truth to power, even if i respectd a ed and did behind closed doors, it would be a problem, and frankly if i did it publicly like this, i would be killed. >> this is what colonel vindman testified to in his opening statement. in russia my act of expressing my concerns to the chain of com

mr vindman revealed he twice, raised concerns about how senior officials had been handling ukraine.l on the 25th that he reported it "without hesitation". here he is speaking today. it was inappropriate, it was improperfor the president it was inappropriate, it was improper for the president to request, to demand an investigation into a political opponent, especially with a foreign power, where there is at best dubious belief that this would be a com pletely belief that this would be a completely impartial investigation. and that this would have significant implications if it became public knowledge, and it would be perceived asa knowledge, and it would be perceived as a power play, it would undermine oui’ as a power play, it would undermine our ukraine policy, and it would undermine our national security. —— partisan play. aleem maqbool joins us now from washington. this has been an interesting day and we are only halfway through and it will be an interesting week with all the public testimony. witness state m e nts the public testimony. witness statements behind closed doors prior

mr. chairman. colonel vindman, let's go back to that pair of meetings on pair on july 10th where you witnessed ambassador sondland inform the ukrainian officials that as a prerequisite to a white house meeting, between the two presidents, quote, ukraine yaia would have to deliver an investigation into the bidens, end quote. you said that ambassador sondland was, quote, calling for an investigation that didn't exist into the bidens and burisma. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> it's that same afternoon that you went to mr. eisenberg, the counsel? >> that meeting occurred within the afternoon, and it was within a couple of hours i spoke to mr. eisenberg. >> how did he react? >> he was cool, calm, and colle collected. he took notes and said he would look into it. >> and did he not also tell you to feel free to come back if you had additional concerns? >> he did. >> ambassador sondland had told you that his request to the ukrainians had been coordinated with the chief of staff, acting chief of staff, mick mulvan

mr. morrison said this, i had concerns about lieutenant colonel vindman's judgment. among the discussions i had with dr. hill and the transition was our team. its strength, weaknesses and fiona and others raised concerns about alex's judgment and mr. morse was asked by mr. castor, did anyone ever bring concerns that colonel vindman may have leaked something. mr. morrison replied yes. so your boss had concerns about your judgment. dr. hill had concerns about your judgment. your colleagues had concerns about your judgment and your colleagues felt r there were times when you leaked information. any idea why they have those impressions? >> yes, representative jordan, i'll start by reading dr. hill's own words as she, she attested to in my last evaluation that was dated middle of july right before she left. alex is a top 1% military officer and the best i've worked with in my 15 years of government service. he's brilliant. unflappable and exercises excellent judgment. i'm sorry. exemplary during numerous visits. mr. morrison, the date of that was -- yeah, let's see, i'm so

mr. nunes. >> thank the gentlemen. >> lieutenant colonel vindman, before i turn to mr. jordan, i asked miss williams about this, about if she had ever accessed without authorization fellow employees' computer system. she answered no to the question. have you ever accessed anyone's computer system at the nsc without authorization? >> without their knowledge, no. >> knowledge or authorization? >> i'm sorry? >> knowledge or authorization? you never accessed someone's computer without their knowledge or authorization? >> correct. >> mr. jordan? >> i thank the ranking member. colonel, i want to thank you for your service and sacrifice to our great country. this afternoon, your former boss, mr. morrison is going to be sitting right where you're sitting and he's going to testify and i want to give you a chance, i think we're bringing you a copy, i want to give you a chance to respond to some of the things that mr. morrison said in his deposition. page 82 of the transcript from mr. morrison. mr. morrison said this. "i had concerns about lieutenant colonel vindman's judgment. am

mr. vindman, you quickly corrected him and wanted to be called lieutenant colonel vindman. o you always insist on civilians calling you by your bank? >> mr. stewart, representative stewart, i'm in uniform wearing the military rank. i thought it was just appropriate to stick>> with thai apologize -- the attacks that i've had in the press and on twitter that kind of eliminated the fact either marginalizing me or --ilitary officer >> i'm just telling you the ranking member meant no disrespect to you. >> i believe that. >> i'd like to go back to the previous testimony. much has been talked about as we discussed between president trump, president zelensky and the word favor and this being the basis for impeachment. your interpretation of the word favor and i'm paraphrasing, feel free to correct me, you said in a military culture which you and i are both familiar with, when a superior officer asks for a favor, they would interpret that as a demand, is that a fair synopsis of what you previously stated? >> representative, when a superior makes a request, that is an order. >> in sho

mr. vindman? >> yes. >> i'm sorry, colonel vindman. and what were some of those concerns that were brought to your attention? >> there were -- >> i'm sorry. we are not going to -- i'm going to instruct him not to answer, because i think that it's beyond the scope of what you're asking for. that's concerns, mr. castor, predated any involvement with ukrainian sector assistance. >> well, during the deposition, i asked you, mr. morrison, whether others race e raised th concern that colonel vindman may have leaked information. >> you did ask that, yes. >> and your answer was? >> others have represented that, yes. >> okay. and i asked you whether you were concerned colonel vindman did not keep you in the loop at all times with his official duties? >> yes. >> and in fact, when he went to the national security council lawyers following the july 25th call, he did not first come to you; is that correct? >> correct. >> and you were his supervisor in the chain of command, correct? >> correct. >> and in hindsight, did you wish that he had come to y

mr. vindman. estified in your deposition you didn't know the whistleblower. >> it's lieutenant colonel vindman, please. >> cnn white house correspondent joining us now. if the white house didn't take him seriously today, they did use the official white house twitter account to criticize him. >> yes. that's exactly what happened today. we saw the white house use the official twitter account to go after a current white house official. quoting morrison who testified about his concerns about vindman's judgment. and so the white house quoted a line. from the testimony. in an official white house tweet. again to under line this. this is someone who currently works at the white house who the white house is saying has bad judgment. so just let that sink in. as for the president we saw him sountd off on vindman. earlier today. he essentially mocked vindman for the moment where he corrected nunes on how to properly refer to him. by his rank. it was relative restraint from the president. i under line relative

mr. vindman? >> yes. >> i'm sorry colonel vindman. and what were some of the concerns that were brought to your attention? >> there were -- >> i'm sorry, i'm going to instruct him not to answer. i'm going to instruct him not to answer because i think that is it is beyond the scope of what you're asking for. these concerns, mr. caster, pre-dated any involvement with ukrainian secretary assistance. >> well, during the deposition, i asked you mr. morris whether any others raised the concern that colonel vindman may have leaked information? >> you did ask that, yes. >> and your answer was? >> others had represented that, yes. >> and i asked you whether you were concerned colonel vindman did not keep you in the loop at all times with his official duties? >> yes. >> and, in fact, when he went to the national security council lawyers following the july 25th call he did not first come to you, is that correct? >> correct. >> and you were his supervisor in the chain of command, correct? >> correct. >> and in hindsight did you wish that he had c

mr. vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistle-blower. >> ranking memberit's lieutenant colonel vindman, please. >> congressman chris stewart actually going so far as to question why he was wearing his military uniform even though it is not at all unusual for military officers detailed to the nsc to wear their uniforms for congressional hearings. >> lieutenant colonel vindman, i see you're wearing your dress uniform. knowing that's not the uniform of the day, that you normally wear a suit to the white house. >> and then there is this from the president this afternoon at the white house. >> i don't know him. i don't know, as he says, the lieutenant colonel. i understand somebody had the misfortune of calling him mister, and he corrected him. i never saw the man. i understand now he wears his uniform when he goes in. >> one of these two men -- okay? one of these two men, the president and lieutenant colonel vindman, earned the right to wear the uniform of this country as he sees fit. one of these two men devoted his life to duty and honor. one of these two m

mr. vindman. in the course of one of the meetings sometimes in the june time frame i sat down with mr. morrisson a morrison and we went through our organizational charts, who was staying, who was rotating out, and we talked about everybody's strengths and weaknesses. i always ask my staff to do feed back to talk about what i was not doing. and i said that i was concerned about the way things were trending in ukraine policy. so colonel vindman is a highly decorated officer. he came to us from the chairman's officer, and we were evaluating and looking at him in the continue text of what his future positions would be in the context of the u.s. army. i was concerned that if he decided to leave the military, perhaps he was not as well suits for something more suited. not everyone is suited for that. that does not mean that we kept questioning his overall judgment or questioning it anywhere near his substantive expertise. she great on russian defense issues, he had been in charge of the russian campaign, thinking through at the chairman's office and in the pentagon. this was a very specific