mr. yermak and mr. giuliani and discussing with mr. yermak and ambassador sondland a possible statement to be made by the ukrainian president i did not know of any linkage between the hold on security assistance and ukraine pursuing investigations. no one had ever said that to me and i never con sayed such a linkage to the ukrainians. i opposed the hold as soon as i learned about it on july 18th and thought we could turn it around before the ukrainians ever knew or became alarmed about it. i did not know the reason for the hold. but i viewed it as a u.s. policy problem that we needed to fix internally and i was confident we would do so. i believe the ukrainians became aware of the hold on august 29th and not before. that date is the first time any of them asked me about the hold by forwarding an article that had been published in politico. when i spoke to the ukrainians about the hold after august 29th, instead of telling them they needed to do something to get the hold released, i told them the opposite. that they should know be alarme

mr. yermak would say burr mace in 2016. mr. yermak provided me a draft statement, and i wanted to be assured that this statement would actually correct the perception that mr. giuliani had of ukraine and what they stand for now so that that would also be conveyed to president trump and solve this problem that i'd observed with our may 23rd meeting with the president. the problem that he's getting a bad set of information, statement like this could potentially correct that. >> so was mr. giuliani satisfied with this statement? >> no, he was not. >> why not? >> he believed that it needed to say burisma and 2016 specifically or else it would not be credible, it would not mean anything new. >> so, in fact, mr. jewel yagiu wanted it to state burisma and one specifically for president trump. mr. ambassador, here's the text you sent to the ukrainian official on august 13th, let's put that up on the screen. you said hi, andre. good talking. following is the text with an insert at the end for the two key items. mr. ambassador, those two

mr. yermak would say burr mace in 2016. mr. yermak provided me a draft statement, and i wanted to be assured that this statement would actually correct the perception that mr. giuliani had of ukraine and what they stand for now so that that would also be conveyed to president trump and solve this problem that i'd observed with our may 23rd meeting with the president. the problem that he's getting a bad set of information, statement like this could potentially correct that. >> so was mr. giuliani satisfied with this statement? >> no, he was not. >> why not? >> he believed that it needed to say burisma and 2016 specifically or else it would not be credible, it would not mean anything new. >> so, in fact, mr. jewel yagiu wanted it to state

mr. yermak provided me a statement. wanted to be assured that this statement would actually correct the perception that mr. giuliani had of ukraine and what they stand for now so that that would also be conveyed to president trump and solve this problem that i had observed with our may 23rd meeting with the president. the problem being that he is getting a bad set of information, a statement like this could potentially correct that. >> was mr. guiliani satisfied with the statement? >> no, he was not. he believed it needed to say burisma and 2016 specifically or else it would not be credible, would not mean anything. >> so in fact, mr. guiliani wanted a statement that referenced burisma and the 2016 elections explicitly. one that would benefit, essent

mr. yermak and mr. giuliani and discussing with mr. yermak and ambassador sondland a possible statement that could be made by the ukrainian president, i did not know of any linkage between the hold on security assistance and ukraine pursuing investigations. no one had ever said that to me and i never conveyed such a linkage to the ukrainians. i opposed the hold on u.s. security assistance as soon as i learned about it on july 18th and thought we could turn it around before the ukrainians ever knew or became alarmed about it. i did not know the reason for the hold, but i viewed it as a u.s. policy problem that we needed to fix internally and i was confident we would do so. i believe the ukrainians became aware of the old on august 29th and not before. that date is the first time any of them asked me about the hold by forwarding an article that had been published in "politico." when i spoke to the ukrainians about the hold after august 29th, instead of telling them they needed to do something to get the hold released, i told then the oppo

mr. yermak provided me a statement. i wanted to be assured that this statement would actually correct the perception that mr. giuliani had of ukraine and what they stand for now so that that would also be conveyed to president trump and solve this problem that i had observed with our may 23rd meeting with the president. the problem being that he is getting a bad set of information, a statement like this could potentially correct that. >> was mr. guiliani satisfied with the statement? >> no, he was not. he believed it needed to say burisma and 2016 specifically or else it would not be credible, would not mean anything. >> so in fact, mr. guiliani wanted a statement that referenced burisma and the 2016 elections explicitly. one that would benefit, essentially, president trump. it is to invest or come here is the text you sent to the ukrainian official on august august 13th. let's put that up on the screen. you said, "hi, good talking. following is a text with an insert at the end for the two key items." mr. investor, those

mr. yermak and mr. giuliani and discussing with mr. yermak and ambassador sondland a possible statement that could be made by the ukrainian president, i did not know of any linkage between the hold on security assistance and ukraine pursuing investigations. no one had ever said that to me and i never conveyed such a linkage to the ukrainians. i opposed the hold on u.s. security assistance as soon as i learned about it on july 18th and thought we could turn it around before the ukrainians ever knew or became alarmed about it. i did not know the reason for the hold, but i viewed it as a u.s. policy problem that we needed to fix internally and i was confident we would do so. i believe the ukrainians became aware of the old on august 29th and not before. that date is the first time any of them asked me about the hold by forwarding an article that had been published in "politico." when i spoke to the ukrainians about the hold after august 29th, instead of telling them they needed to do something to get the hold released, i told then the oppo

mr. yermak in warsaw. ambassador sondland told mr. yermak that the security assistance money would not come until president zelensky committed to pursue the burisma investigation. i was alarmed by what mr. morrison told me about the sondland-yermak conversation. i understand mr. morrison testified at his deposition that ambassador sondland might be sufficient for the ukrainian prosecutor general to had heard that the security assistance, not just the white house meeting was conditioned on the investigations. very concerned, on that same day, september 1st, i sent ambassador sondland a text message asking if we are now saying that the security assistance and a white house meeting are conditioned on investigations. ambassador sondland responded asking me to call him, which i did. during that phone call, ambassador sondland told me that president trump had told him that he wants president zelensky to state publicly that ukraine will investigate burisma and alleged ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. ambassador sondland also told

mr. yermak? >> that the ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations as a condition of having the -- lifted. >> you testified that you are not comfortable with what ambassador sondland had told you. why not? >> well, i was concerned about what i saw as essentially an additional hurdle to accomplish what i have been directed to help accomplish, which was giving the president the information he needed to determine that the security sector systems could go forward. >> so now there is a whole other wrinkle to it, right? >> there was an appearance of one based on what ambassador sondland represented. >> you told ambassador taylor about this as well? >> are probably represented to ambassador taylor about up phone call. >> the testimony other than one small distinction between president zelensky and the prosecutor general was accurate as to what you told him. is that correct? >> about that conversation is. >> you confirmed everything that ambas

mr. yermak and mr. giuliani and discussing with mr. yermak and ambassador sondland a possible statement that could be made by the ukrainian president, i did not know of any linkage between the hold on security assistance and ukraine pursuing investigations. no one had ever said that to me and i never conveyed such a linkage to the ukrainians. i opposed the hold on u.s. security assistance as soon as i learned about it on july 18th and thought we could turn it around before the ukrainians ever knew or became alarmed about it. i did not know the reason for the hold, but i viewed it as a u.s. policy problem that we needed to fix internally and i was confident we would do so. i believe the ukrainians became aware of the old on august 29th and not before. that date is the first time any of them asked me about the hold by forwarding an article that had been published in "politico." when i spoke to the ukrainians about the hold after august 29th, instead of telling them they needed to do something to get the hold released, i told then the oppo

mr. yermak to me. the following day, august 11th, and this is critical, i sent an email to counselor brechbuhl and lisa kenna. lisa kenna was frequently used as the pathway to secretary pompeo, as sometimes he preferred to receive his emails through her. she would print them out and put them in front of him. with the subject ukraine, i wrote, mike, referring to mike pompeo, kurt and i negotiated a statement from zelensky to be delivered for our review in a day or two. the contents will hopefully make the boss happy enough, the boss being the president, to authorize an invitation. zelensky plans to have a big presser, press conference, on the openness subject, including specifics next week, all of which referred to the 2016 and the burisma. ms. kenna replied, gordon, i'll pass to the secretary, thank you. again, everyone was in the loop. curiously, and this was very interesting to me, on august 26th, shortly before his visit to kiev, ambassador bolton's office requested mr. giuliani's contact informatio

mr. yermak. when he reached mr. yermak's office, ambassador sondland had already gone into the meeting, i expressed to mr. yermak's assistant i was to join the meeting as the embassy's representative and strongly urged her to let me in, but she told me ambassador sondland and mr. yermak insisted the meeting be one on one with no note taker. i then waited in the ante room until the meeting ended with a member of ambassador sondland's staff and a member of the kyiv staff. when the meeting ended, the two staffs and i accompanied ambassador sondland out of the building, ambassador sondland said he wanted to go to lunch and i told ambassador sondland i would be happy to join him and the two staffers for lunch if he wanted to brief me out on his meeting with mr. yermak or discuss other issues. ambassador sondland said i should join. the four of us went to a nearby restaurant and sat on an outdoor terrace. i sat directly across from ambassador sondland. the two staffers sat off to our sides. at first the lunch was largely s

mr. yermak texted me. once we have a date, which is a date for the white house meeting, we will call for a press briefing, announcing upcoming visit and outlining vision for the reboot of the u.s./ukraine relationship including among other things, burisma and election meddling in investigations. this is from mr. yermak to me. the following day, august 11th, and this is critical. i sent an email to counselor brechbuhl and lisa kenna. lisa kenna was frequently used as the pathway to secretary pompeo as sometimes he preferred to receive his emails through her. she would print them out and put them in front of him. with the subject ukraine, i wrote, mike, referring to mike pompeo, kurt and i negotiated a statement from zelensky to be delivered for our review in a day or two. the contents will hopefully make the boss happy enough, the boss being the president, to authorize an invitation. zelensky plans to have a big presser -- press conference, on the openness subject including specifics next week. all of which

mr. yermak. when he reached mr. yermak's office, ambassador sondland had already gone into the meeting, i expressed to mr. yermak's assistant i was to join the meeting as the embassy's representative and strongly urged her to let me in, but she told me ambassador sondland and mr. yermak insisted the meeting be one on one with no note taker. i then waited in the ante room until the meeting ended with a member of ambassador sondland's staff and a member of the kyiv staff. when the meeting ended, the two staffs and i accompanied ambassador sondland out of the building, ambassador sondland said he wanted to go to lunch and i told ambassador sondland i would be happy to join him and the two staffers for lunch if he wanted to brief me out on his meeting with mr. yermak or discuss other issues. ambassador sondland said i should join. the four of us went to a nearby restaurant and sat on an outdoor terrace. i sat directly across from ambassador sondland. the two staffers sat off to our sides. at first the lunch was largely s

mr. yermak aside, did mr. yermak give you any feedback on that meeting? >> i did not get anything specific after that. this was around i believe september 1st or 2nd. and it was at that time that i had been i think texted by mr. yermak and was subsequently in touch with him and pushtakia where i told them both and the defense minister, told them all, don't worry, we know about this, we're trying to fix it. i think i left the conversation at that. >> and those are ukrainian officials, to the best of your knowledge, they trusted you? >> very much so. we had a very close relationship. >> so when you made statements like that to them, do you think they believed you? >> i think they believed me. i think they would also have other conversations and they would hear things from other people. but i also think that they knew i was sincere with them. >> and they also trusted ambassador taylor? >> yes. >> i would just like to demystify a little bit of the whole mayor giuliani role here. you met with him i believe one time? >> that's correct. >> and you had some -- yo

mr. yermak and mr. giuliani. ambassador bolton also expressed frustration about ambassador sondland's expansive interpretation of his mandate. after president trump canceled his visit to warsaw, we continued to try to appeal to the president in foreign policy and national security terms. to that end, ambassador taylor told me that ambassador bolton recommended he and ambassador taylor send a first person cable to secretary pompeo articulating the importance of the security assistance. ambassador taylor's direction i drafted and transmitted the cable on ambassador taylor's behalf on august 29th which attempted to explain the importance of ukraine and the assistance of national security. byas this point my clear impression was that the securite assistance hold was likely intended by the president either as an expression of dissatisfaction with the ukrainians or as an effort to increase the pressure on them to do so.in on september 5th i took notes senator johnson and chris murphy's m

mr. yermak texted me. once we have a date, which is a date for the white house meeting, we will call for a press briefing announcing upcoming visit and outlining vision for the reboot of the u.s.-ukraine relationship, including among other things, burisma and election meddling in investigation. this is from mr. yermak to me. the following day, august 11th, and this is critical. i sent an e-mail to counselor and lisa kenna. lisa kenna was frequently used as the pathway to secretary pompeo, as sometimes he preferred to receive his e-mails through her. she would print them out and put them in front of him. with the subject ukraine, i wrote, mike, referring to mike pompeo, kurt and i negotiated a statement from zelensky to be delivered for our review in a day or two. the contents will hopefully make the boss happy enough, the boss being the president, to authorize an invitation. zelensky plans to have a big pressor, press conference, on the openness subject, including specifics next week. all of which referred

mr. yermak. when he reached mr. yermak's office, ambassador sondland had already gone into the meeting, i explained to mr. yermak's assistant i was to join the meeting as the embassy's representative and strongly urged her to let me in, but she told me ambassador sondland and mr. yermak insisted the meeting be one on one with no note taker. i then waited in the ante room until the meeting ended with a member of ambassador sondland's staff and a member of the kyiv staff. when the meeting ended, the two staffs and i accompanied ambassador sondland out of the building, ambassador sondland said he wanted to go to lunch and i told ambassador sondland i would be happy to join him and the two staffers for lunch if he wanted to brief me out on his meeting with mr. yermak or discuss other issues. ambassador sondland said i should join. the four of us went to a nearby restaurant and sat on an outdoor terrace. i sat directly across from ambassador sondland. the two staffers sat off to our sides. at first the lunch was largely s

mr. yermak to me. the following day, august 11th, and this is critical, i sent an email to counselor brechtbull and leeakisa kenna, frequently as the pathway to secretary pompeo as sometimes he'd prefer to receive his emails from her. she would print them out and put them in front of him, with the subject "ukraine." i wrote "mike, kurt and i negotiated a statement from zelensky to be delivered for our review in a day or two. the contents will hopefully make the boss happy enough" the boss being the president, "to authorize an invitation. zelensky plans to have a big press presser," press conference, "on the openness subject included to the specifics next week which refer to the 2016 and the barissma." ms. kenna replied "gordon, i'll pass to the secretary, thank you." again, everyone was in the loop. curiously, and this was very interesting to me, on august 26th, shortly before his visit to kiev, ambassador bolton's office requested mr. giuliani's contact information from me. i sent ambassador bolton th

mr. yermak to me. the following day, august 11th, and this is critical, i sent an email to counselor brechbuhl and lisa kenna. lisa ke inna was frequently use as a path way to secretary pompeo. she would print them out and put them in front of him. with the subject, ukraine, i wrote, mike, referring to mike pompeo, kurt and i negotiated a statement from zelensky to be delivered for our review in a day or two. the contents will hopefully make the boss happy enough -- the boss being the president -- to authorize an invitation. zelensky plans to have a big presser, press conference, on the openness subject, including specifics, next week. all of which referred to the 2016 and the burisma. ms. kenna replied, gordon, i'll pass to the secretary. thank you. again, everyone was in the loop. curiously, and this was very interesting to me, on august 26th, shortly before his visit to kiev, ambassador bolton's office requested mr. giuliani's contact information from me. i sent ambassador bolton the information dir

mr. yermak? >> correct. >> and mr. yermak also had some meetings with ambassador sondland, did mr. yermak ever give you any feedback from his interactions with ambassador sondland? >> i cannot say whether he did or didn't we were in frequent contact and we talked about the issues as we went along. >> the episode at warsaw where inherently about his nerve sondland pulled the ambassador does aside did mr. yermak give you any feedback on that? >> i did not get anything specific after that. this was around september 1st or second. and it was at that time that i had been texted by mr. yermak and was subsequently in touch with him where i told them both i told them all, do not worry, we know about this, we are trying to fix it. and i think i left the conversation at that. >> what do ukrainian officials, the best of your knowledge, they trusted you? >> very much so. we had a close relationship. >> so when you made statements like that to them do you think they believe you? >> i think they believe me i think they would also have other conversations and they would hear things from other peop

mr. yermak the meeting be one on one with no notetaker. waited until the meeting ended, along with a number of ambassador sondland's staff and kiev's staff. when the meeting ended, the staffers and i accompanied ambassador sondland. ambassador sondland said he wanted to go to lunch. i told ambassador sondland i would be happy to join him if he wanted to brief me on his meeting and other issues. ambassador sondland said i should join. the four of us sat on an outside terrace. two staffers sat off to our sides. at first the lunch was social. ambassador sondland selected a bottle of wine and we discussed marketing strategies for his hotel business. during the lunch, ambassador sondland said he will call president trump to give him an update. ambassador sondland placed a call on his mobile phone and i heard him announce several times, gordon sondland holding for the president. it appears he was being transferred through several layers of switchboards. i heard ambassador sondland's demeanor change. he had been connected to president trump. whil

mr. yermak, has been the subject of some controversy. ambassador volker testified yesterday it wasn't until the end of the meeting, mr. danylyuk he said he was going through some real detailed information about some of the plans he had. but it wasn't until the end of the meeting ambassador volker rec lekts that you mentioned something general about investigations. what do you remember from that meeting? recollection, particularly if he had notes. i know the desire to have the 2016 election dnc server and burisma were already being discussed by them. again, i had no direct contact with mr. giuliani on july 10th, but through ambassador volker and, i probably mentioned that this needs to happen in order to move the process forward. that seemed to be the conventional wisdom at the time. i don't recall any abrupt ending of the meeting or people storming out or anything like that. that would have been very memorable if someone had stormed out of a meeting based on something i said. >> and nobody accused you at that point in time of being involv

mr. yermak, has been the subject of some controversy. ambassador volker yesterday testified it wasn't until the end of the meeting. that mr. danyluk was going through some plans he had. it wasn't until the end of the meeting that ambassador volker recommends you mentioned something general about investigations. what do you remember from that meeting. >> i won't dispute mr. volker's notes. i know the desire to have the 2016 election dnc server and burisma were already being discussed by then. again, i had no direct contact with mr. giuliani on july 10th but through ambassador volker and i probably mentioned that this needs to happen in order to move the process forward. that seemed to be the conventional wisdom at the time. i don't recall any abrupt ending of the meeting or people storming out or anything like that. that would have been very memorable if someone had stormed out of a meeting based on something i said. >> nobody accused you of that point in time being involved with some sort of drug deal? >> no. >> did dr. hill ever relate t

mr. yermak to me.h, and this is critical, i sent an e-mail to counselor breckbull and lisa kenna. lisa kenna was used as the pathway to secretary pompeo, as sometimes he preferred to receive his e-mails through her. she would print them out and put them in front of him. with the subject ukraine. i wrote, mike, referring to mike pompeo, curt and i negotiated a statement from zelensky to be delivered for our review in a day or two. the contents will, hopefully, make the boss happy enough. the boss being the president, to authorize an invitation. zelensky plans to have a big presser, press conference, on the openness subject, including specifics next week. all of which referred to the 2016 and the burisma. miss kenna replied, gone, i'll pass to the secretary. thank you. again, everyone was in the loop. curiously, and this was very interesting to me, on august 26th, shortly before his visit to kiev, ambassador bolton's office requested mr. guiliani's contact information from me. i sent ambassador bolton th

mr. yermak in connection with vice president pence's -- ambassador taylor recalls that mr. morrison told ambassador taylor that i conveyed this message to mr. yermak in connection with vice president's meeting in warsaw. we've got six people having four conversations in one sentence and you told me this is where you got your clear understanding. even though you had three opportunities with president zelensky for him to tell you you know what we're going to do these investigations to get the aid. never makes an announcement, mr. does a cnn interview. you weren't on the call, were you? >> i did not. >> you never talked with chief of staff mulvaney. >> i never did. >> you didn't meet the president. >> that is correct. >> two of those they had never heard about as far as i know. there was no reason for it to come up. >> president zelensky never made an announcement. this is what i can't believe. you're their star witness. they're their first witness. >> mr. jordan -- >> based on this i've seen church prayer chains that are easier to understand than that. ambassador taylor recal

mr. yermak a top official in zelensky's team as a note taker. i had not expected to join the meeting and was a flight of stairs behind ambassador sondland. when i reached the office ambassador sondland had already gone in. i explained to the assistant i was supposed to join the meeting as the embassy's representative but she told me ambassador sondland and mr. yermak insisted the meeting be one-on-one with no note taker. i wanted in the ante room along with a member of ambassador sondland's staff. we accompanied sondland into an embassy vehicle. ambassador sondland said that he wanted to go for lunch. i told ambassador sondland i would be happy to join if he wanted to brief me on the meeting and discuss other issues and ambassador sondland said that i could join. the two staffers joined as well. the four of us went to a nearby restaurant and sat in an outdoor terrace. i sat directly across from ambassador sondland. wolf, when you go through the details of this actual deposition of this opening statement, it makes very clear during the lunch amba

mr. yermak? >> correct. >> and mr. yermak also had some meetings with ambassador sondland, did mr. yermak ever give you any feedback from his interactions with ambassador sondland? >> i cannot say whether he did or didn't we were in frequent contact and we talked about the issues as we went along. >> the episode at warsaw where inherently about his nerve sondland pulled the ambassador does aside did mr. yermak give you any feedback on that? >> i did not get anything specific after that. this was around september 1st or second. and it was at that time that i had been texted by mr. yermak and was subsequently in touch with him where i told them both i told them all, do not worry, we know about this, we are trying to fix it. and i think i left the conversation at that. >> what do ukrainian officials, the best of your knowledge, they trusted you? >> very much so. we had a close relationship. >> so when you made statements like that to them do you think they believe you? >> i think they believe me i think they would also have other conversations and they would hear things from other peop

mr. yermak, oh, like you want us to do with the bidens and clintons. they're sophisticated enough actors to recognize when we're saying do as we say, not as we do, are they not? >> yes, sir. >> you also in your testimony and i was struck by this today, when even after the aid is lifted, ukraine still felt pressured to make these statements and you and ambassador taylor were worried they were going to do it on cnn. and you said that ambassador taylor, addressed the importance of staying out of u.s. politics and hoped no interview was planned mr. yermak did not answer but shrugged in resignation as if to indicate they had no choice. in short, everyone thought there was going to be an interview and that the ukrainians believed they had to do it. you're acknowledging, i think, mr. holmes, are you not, that ukraine very much felt pressured to undertake these investigations that the president or rudy giuliani and ambassador sondland and others were demanding? >> yes, sir. although the hold on the security assistance may have been lifted, there were still thi

mr. yermak and mr. giuliani. bolton expressed frustration about sondland's expansive interpretation of his mandate. after president trump canceled his visit to warsaw we continued to try to appeal to the president and foreign policy and national security terms. to that end ambassador taylor told me ambassador bolton recommended he taylor send a first person cable to secretary pompeo detailing the importance of the security. i transmitted a cable on taylor's behalf on august 29th to explain the importance of the security assistance. by this point, however, my clear impression was that the security assistance hold was likely intended by the president either as an expression of dissatisfaction with the ukrainians who hadn't agreed to the burisma/biden investigation or to increase pressure on them to do so. on september 5th i took notes at senator johnson and senator chris mur fear east meeting with zelensky in kiev. they expressed strong support for ukraine senator johnson cautioned president zelensky that president

mr. yermak, mr. rmak's aide, ambassador volker and ambassador sondland and a couple of people were from the state department. i wondered for a while if one of secretary's perry's group had been there, too. i honestly cannot remember. >> ambassador volker was there during that entire time. >> he was there he didn't actually speak very much during that meeting. and i heard his deposition and i read his deposition where he didn't really recall that encounter. again, he didn't really speak. ambassador sondland was doing most of the speaking. >> and i think you described it as you came in -- ambassador sondland was talking about how he had an agreement with chief of staff mulvaney for a meeting with the ukrainians. if they were going forward with the investigations. while this was taking place and afterwards, how were the ukrainians reacting to what was being said? >> well, at the time, mr. yermak was quite impassive, he had an aide with him. his aide was sitting next to him in the original meeting with am

mr. yermak of what was required, yes. >> so, ukraine finds out about the hold. you are not able to give hem a reason for the hold. no one is able to give them a reason for the hold. they know the president wants these investigations. and then they are told in warsaw by ambassador sondland essentially you are not getting the aid unless you do these investigations. correct? >> that's correct. >> sir, you have been asked how can there be conditioning if the ukrainians didn't know but ukrainians were told by ambassador sondland, were they not. >> they were. they didn't know, as near as i could tell, ukrainians did not know about the hold on the phone call on july 25th. that's true. they were told, as you said, mr. chairman, on the 1st of september. >> and, in fact, while they may not have known during the time of the call, they would find out. and when they did find out, they would know what the president wanted, correct? >> that's correct. >> representative sewell? >> so, mr. kent, i would like to refer you to the discussion of the may 23rd meeting in the oval offi

mr. yermak? >> that the ukranians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations as a condition of having the aid lifted. >> so there it is. there's the so-called quid pro quo. the investigations referring to ukraine's involvement in hacking, whatever, the 2016 presidential elections on behalf of hillary clinton. that was a made point as well as investigation of the biedens. >> -- bidens. >> he talked about he had spoken with sondland who had just gotten off the phone with trump. he testified that someone related there was no quid pro quo, but zelensky had to make a statement about the investigations and he had to want to do it. aka, that's the exchange to get the military aid lifted. that's really interesting in effect because morrison testified that every time someone said he had spoken with president trump, he went back and confirmed they had actually spoken because some people said sondland inflated himself, his connection with the president. her

mr. yermak and mr. sondland to take notes. i had not expected to join that meeting and was a flight of stairs behind ambassador stopbd as he met mr. yermak. when i reached the office, ambassador sondland had already gone into the meeting. i explained to the assistant i was supposed to join the meeting as the embassy's remit. but she told me they had insisted the meeting be one on one with no note taker. i waited in a anti room long with a member of the u.s. embassy kiev staff. when the meeting sended we accompanied ambassador sondland out of the administration building. ambassador sondland said he wanted to go to lunch. i told ambassador sondland that i would be happy to join him and the two staffers if he wanted to brief me out on his mechanics with mr. yermak and other issues and ambassador sondland said i should join. the four of us went to a nearby restaurant and sat on an outdoor terra terrace. i sat direct threu across from ambassador sondland. the two staffers off to our sights. the lunch was largely social. he selected

mr. yermak, mr. yermak's aid, ambassador volker and ambassador sundays. i wonder if someone from secretary perry's group had been there too but i honestly can't remember. >> ambassador volker was there? >> he was there but didn't speak very much during that meeting, and i heard his deposition, read his deposition where he didn't really recall that encounter. again, he didn't really speak, ambassador sondland was doing most of the speaking. >> i think you described it as you came in, ambassador sondland was talking about how he had an agreement with chief of staff mulvaney for a meeting with the ukranians if they were going forward with the investigations. while this was taking place and afterwards, how were the ukranians reacting to what was being said? >> well, at the time mr. yermak was quite impasse i have. he had an aid with him, his aid was next to him in the original meeting of ambassador bolton, was from time to time actually on this side whispering to him. i wasn't sure myself. i had not met mr. yarmuth before, what his english was. i thought mr.

mr. yermak, has been the subject of some controversy. ambassador volker testified yesterday it wasn't until the end of the meeting, mr. danylyuk he said he was going through some real detailed information about some of the plans he had. but it wasn't until the end of the meeting ambassador volker rec lekts that you mentioned something general about investigations. what do you remember from that meeting? recollection, particularly if he had notes. i know the desire to have the 2016 election dnc server and burisma were already being discussed by them. again, i had no direct contact with mr. giuliani on july 10th, but through ambassador volker and, i probably mentioned that this needs to happen in order to move the process forward. that seemed to be the conventional wisdom at the time. i don't recall any abrupt ending of the meeting or people storming out or anything like that. that would have been very memorable if someone had stormed out of a meeting based on something i said. >> and nobody accused you at that point in time of being involv

mr. yermak,esibe whe you were sitting at the restaurant? >> yes, sir. the restaurant has sort of glass doors that open onto a terrace. we were at the first tables on the terrace, so immediately outside of the interior of the restaurant. the doors were all wide open. there was tables, a table for four, i recall it being two tables for two pushed together. it was quite a wide table. i was directly across from ambassador sondland. we were close enough that we could share an appetizer. the two staffers were off to our right at this next table. >> now, you said that at some point ambassador sondland pulled out his cell phone and called president trump. this was an unsecure cell phone, is that right? >> yes, sir. >> in the middle of a restaurant in kyiv? >> yes. >> now, you said that you were able to hear president trump's voice through the receiver. how were you able to hear if it was not on speakerphone? >> several things. it was quite loud when the president came on, quite distinctive. ambassador sondland said he often speaks very loudly over the phone. i

mr. yermak to me. the following day, august 11, and this is critical, i sent an email to counselor brechtbull and lisa cannot. -- and lisa kenna. lisa kenna frequently used as the pathway to secretary pompeo as sometimes he'd prefer to receive his emails from her. she would print them out and put them in front of him, with the subject "ukraine." i wrote, "mike, kurt and i negotiated a statement from zelensky to be delivered for our review in a day or two. the contents will hopefully make the boss happy enough -- the boss being the president -- to authorize an invitation. zelensky plans to have a big -- press conference -- on the openness subject included specifics next week," which refer to the 2016 and the burisma. ms. kenna replied, gordon, i'll pass to the secretary, thank you. again, everyone was in the loop. curiously, and this was very interesting to me, on august 26, shortly before his visit to kiev, ambassador bolton's office requested mr. giuliani's contact information from me. i sent ambassad

mr. yermak? >> that the ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations, as a condition of having the aid lifted. >> after this larger meeting with vice president pence and president zelensky, you testified at your deposition that you saw ambassador sondland, immediately go over and pull andre yermak aside and have a conversation, is that right? >> president zelensky left the room, vice president pence left the room. and in sort of an ante room, ambassador sondland and vice president yermak had this discussion, yes. what did ambassador sondland say to you that he told mr. yermak? >> that the ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations as a condition of having the aid lifted. >> among the discussions i had with dr. hill were about ambassador sondland. i think she might have coined it the gordon problem. and i decided to keep track of what ambassador sondland was doing, i didn't nec

mr. yermak where i said that resumption of u.s. aid would likely not occur until ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks." and when he says the anti-corruption statement we know from the context here, we know in part from the huge raft of text messages that were just released by the committees today that when ambassador sondland, even in his revised testimony calls it a public anti-corruption statement, we know he was well aware that what he was demanding of the ukrainian government was that they announce investigations that were specifically being demanded of them by rudy giuliani and president trump and they were investigations that were designed to help president trump's domestic political considerations. here for example -- it's all -- we've got it now. here's a three-way text conversation between gordon sondland and kurt volker, the ukraine envoy, and another ukrainian official. the ukrainian government at this point has sent over a draft statement they're proposing that

mr. yermak, where i said that resumption of usaid would likely not occur until ukraine -- >> that's a veryseen testimony change in that direction consistently. i mean there are very clear pictures emerging. jim jordan says the facts are on donald trump's side. that's pure spin. the facts and the testimony is clear and the president's got a real problem. sondland's testimony today could be really key. but already there, that backtrack says there was a quid pro quo. you can call it solicitation of bribery or whatever else you want. but key aid was being held up unless ukrainians were willing to do the dirty work. i've got to say the idea of the big stuff is 2016 election conspiracies and investigating political rivals for 2020 and not dealing with vladimir putin and russia's inkrergs and dealing with everything. it shows how off the fundamental priorities are at least to this president. the administration wanted continuity. >> let's play this out for a moment of what we might see today because if gordon sondland being a wild card coming in and says, the first option, i don't remember or he p

mr. yermak to take notes. i was a flight of stairs behind ambassador sondland as he headed to meet mr. e, ambassador sondland had already gone into the meeting. i explained to the assistant i was supposed to join the meeting as the embassy's representative and strongly urged her to let me in but she said that ambassador sondland and yermak insisted that it be one on one with no note taker. i then waited in the room. we accompanied ambassador sondland out of the presidential administration building. ambassador sondland said he wanted to go to lunch. i told ambassador sondland i would be happy to join him if he wanted to brief me out on his meeting or other issues. ambassador sondland said i should join. the four of us went to a nearby restaurant and sat on an outside terrace. i sat directly across from ambassador sondland and the two staffers off to our sides. ambassador sondland selected a bottle of wine we shared among the four of us and we discussed marketing strategies for his hotel business. during the lunch, ambassador sondland said he was going to call president trump to give him

mr. yermak.ollowing that meeting in the presence of my staff at a restaurant, ambassador sondland called president trump and told him of his meetings in kiev. the member of my staff could hear president trump on the phone asking ambassador sondland about the investigations. ambassador sondland told president trump the ukrainians were ready to move forward. following the call with president trump, the member of my staff asked ambassador sondland what president trump thought about ukraine. ambassador sondland responded that president trump cares more about the investigations of biden which giuliani was pressing for. >> and i think you said that after the call when your staff asked ambassador sondland what president trump thought of ukraine, his response was that president trump cares more about the investigations of biden? is that right? >> and burisma, yes, sir. >> and i take it the import of that is he cares more about that than he does about ukraine? >> yes, sir. >> that's right, ukraine, at war

mr. yermak or luke outside of the july 10th meeting? >> i recall a courtesy note from mr. yermak within days of his return to july in which he wanted to preserve an open channel communication. and i said, you know, please feel free to contact me with any concerns. >> and were you following this, you no he, sort of two tracks, ambassador taylor walked us through it during his testimony last wednesday. he called it a regular channel then he called it irregular but not outlandish channel with ambassador bolton and vul kerr. were you tracking the sondland and volker during this channel? >> certainly i was aware of the fact they were working together, sondland, ambassador sondland and ambassador volker and secretary perry were working together to advance u.s. policy interests that were in support of what had been agreed to. but i didn't really learn, like i said, until the july 10th, actually there may have been a slitly earlier point. i recall a meeting in which ambassador bolton facilitated a meeting between ambassador volker and bolton in the june time frame. and there may ha

mr. yermak has been the subject of some controversy. mr. volker testified that it wasn't until the end of the meeting mr. danny luck was going through some detailed -- some detailed information about some of the plans he had. the meeting ambassador volker recollects that you mentioned something general about investigations. what do you remember from that meeting? >> again, i'm not going to dispute ambassador volker's recollection, particularly if he had notes. i know that the desire to have the 2016 election, dnc server, and burisma were already being discussed by them. and i probably mentioned that this needs to happen in order to move the process forward. that seemed to be, umm, the conventional wisdom at the time. i don't recall any abrupt ending of the meeting or people storming out or anything like that. that would have been very memorable if someone had stormed out of a meeting based on something i ofsaid. >> okay. nobody accused you at that point in time of being involved in some sort of drug deal? >> no. >> did dr. hill ever relate

mr. yermak where i said that rumgs of u.s. likely not occur until ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks. that's what's been called a quid pro quo. >> that's the crux of the matter. they have it. they have it. investigators have it. he already testified to this. >> i guess what i'm getting at and you're right is if he illuminates that more today, says it out loud today more, if he says there was a quid pro quo, how does the president react to that when the president just claimed there wasn't in. >> let me just finish on the question that bianna posed -- let me recognize myself now. will he pin this and can he pin this all on giuliani? can he say giuliani was the president's surrogate. we were all acting sort of in connection to what giuliani was saying. can that happen today? >> i want to stay in character so this is an inquiry. but yes. there's been an exercise in finger pointing. the higher you get up in the administration, you saw people like vindman and williams, th

mr. yermak expressed concern about his interactions with mr. giuliani. >> and i believe that meeting was somewhere in late august, is that correct? >> it was -- there were meetings and there were i think also phone calls. >> and you are still concerned about corruption in you cranukr correct? >> yes, sir. >> have we seen what this anti-corruption statement we want the ukrainians to make? >> are you referringing to the statement that was being negotiated between kurt volker, gordon sondland and andriy yermak? >> yes. >> that was not an anti-corruption statement. >> what was it? >> if you go back and forth, they shared a draft with rudy giuliani and rudy giuliani said it would not be acceptable if it didn't mention biden and burisma in 2016. >> that was never agreed to or issued by the ukrainian officials, is that correct? >> no statement of that sort was issued, correct. >> and have u.s. businesses ever contacted you all concerned about corruption within ukraine? >> yes, sir. as of this year even? >> yes, sir. >> because the concern is not just

mr. yermak, you saw that, on the day of the phone call. i had been pushing for the phone call because i thought it was important to renew the connection between the two leaders and congratulating mr. zelensky about the parliamentary election. the readout i received from mr. yermak and also from the u.s. side, i'm not sure who it was from the u.s. side but it was a u.s. and ukrainian readout, were largely the same, that it was a good call, it was a congratulatory phone call for the president winning in the parliamentary election. president zelensky reiterated his commitment to reform and fighting corruption in ukraine and president trump did reiterate his invitation to mr. zelensky to visit him in the white house. it was exactly what i thought the phone call would be so i was not surprised at getting that as the readout. >> did you have any discussions with ambassador taylor about this? >> at that time. we were together in ukraine at that time. we went the next day to visit the conflict zone and i'm sure he heard the same readout that i did