mr. yermak, mr. giuliani communicated repeatedly with the white house sending or receiving six text messages and completing several calls. most notably, late in the evening on august 8, mr. giuliani called the white house in a highly distinctive pattern. at 8:53 p.m., giuliani texted a white house number. at 10:09, a number identified only as dash 1 in the white house call records called mr. giuliani five times in rapid succession. two minutes later, mr. giuliani attempted to return the call, trying an office of management and budget number, then the white house situation room, then the white house switchboard. at 10:28, 16 minutes after mr. giuliani tried to call the white house back frantically, situation room, office of management and budget, switchboard, 16 minutes after mr. giuliani tried to call the white house back, giuliani and the dash 1 number connected for four minutes and six seconds. we should be clear, we do not know what mr. giuliani said or even who he talked to. we do not know who wa

mr. yermak, mr. giuliani communicated repeatedly with the white house sending or receiving six text messages and completing several calls. most notably late in the evening on august 8, mr. giuliani called the white house and a highly distinctive pattern. at 8:53 p.m. giuliani texted a white house number. at that's 10:09 a number identified only as -- one in the white house call records called in rapid succession to two minutes later mr. to one knee tempted to return the call trying in office of management and budget number and then the white house situation room and then the white house switchboard at 10:2860 minutes after mr. giuliani tried to call the white house back frantically, situation room office of management and budget, switchboard, 60 minutes after mr. giuliani tried to call the white house back giuliani and the -1 number connected for four minutes and six seconds. we should be clear. we do not know what giuliani said or even who he talked to. we do not know who was on the other end of tha

mr. yermak, mr. giuliani communicated repeatedly with the white house sending or receiving six text messages and completing several calls. most notably late in the evening on august 8th mr. giuliani called the white house in a highly distinctive wa turn. at 8:53 p.m. mr. giuliani texted a white house number. at 10:09 a number identified as dash one in the white house call records called mr. giuliani five times in rapid succession. two minutes later mr. giuliani attempted to return the call trying an office of management and budget number, then the white house situation room, then the white house switchboard. at 10:28, 16 minutes after mr. giuliani tried to call the white house back frantically, situation room, office of management and budget, switchboa switchboard, 16 minutes after mr. giuliani tried to call the white house back, giuliani and the dash one number connected for 4:06. we should be clear, we do not know what mr. giuliani said or even who he talked to. we do not know who was on the other

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. >> ambassador taylor then explained why he was so alarmed by this term, let's hear that as well. >> you said previously that you were alarmed to learn this, why were you alarmed? >> it's one thing to try to leverage a meeting in the white house. it's another thing i thought to leverage security assistance. security assistance to a country at war, dependent on both the security assistance and the demonstration of support. it was much more alarming that the white house meeting was one thing, security assistance was much more alarming. >> upon learning from mr. morrisson that the military aid may be conditioned upon ukraine publicly announcing these 22 investigation, ambassador taylor sent an urgent text message to ambassador sondland asking, are we now saying that security assist

mr. yermak, mr. giuliani communicated repeatedly with the white house sending or receiving six text messages and completing several calls. most notably late in the evening on august 8, mr. giuliani called the white house and a highly distinctive pattern. at 8:53 p.m. giuliani texted a white house number. at that's 10:09 a number identified only as -- one in the white house call records called in rapid succession to two minutes later mr. to one knee tempted to return the call trying in office of management and budget number and then the white house situation room and then the white house switchboard at 10:2860 minutes after mr. giuliani tried to call the white house back frantically, situation room office of management and budget, switchboard, 60 minutes after mr. giuliani tried to call the white house back giuliani and the -1 number connected for four minutes and six seconds. we should be clear. we do not know what giuliani said or even who he talked to. we do not know who was on the other end of tha

mr. yermak. during his public testimony ambassador sondland purported to remember more of this conversation with president trump. although he still couldn't or maintained he couldn't remember if it was on september 7th of september 9th. according to his testimony, president trump did not specifically say there was a quid pro quo, but when sondland simply asked the president what he wanted from ukraine, president trump immediately brought up a quid pro quo. according to sondland president trump said i want nothing, i want no quid pro quo, i want sensz to do the right thing. he said i want him to do what he ran on. in his subsequent testimony, ambassador sondland explained president trump's reference to what he ran on was a nod to rooting out corruption. here corruption like burisma has become code for the investigations that president trump has sought. so you've got ambassador sondland's emerging recollection, but what you've got is actually written notes taken at the time that he does not contest

mr. yermak. it was a very, very brief pull aside conversation that happened within a few seconds. i told mr. yermak that i believe the resumption of u.s. aid would likely not occur until ukraine took some kind of action on the statement we had been discussing for many weeks. >> let's let that sink in for a minute too. you have heard my colleagues at the other table say ukrainians felt no pressure. there is no pressure evidence. of course we've already had testimony about how they did feel pressure and they did not want to be drawn into this political campaign. use over and over in these text messages and e-mails, you go first you announce, no you go first. and we are supposed to believe they felt no pressure? and there it is, it breaks out and open the military aid is being withheld, and there is a connection between the holding of the military aid and these investigations. and the first thing they are asking about, is they send the article and what is happening to this aid? they are ready to com

mr. yermak. it was a very, very brief pull aside conversation that happened within a few seconds. i told mr. yermak that i believe the resumption of u.s. aid would likely not occur until ukraine took some kind of action on the statement we had been discussing for many weeks. >> let's let that sink in for a minute too. you have heard my colleagues at the other table say ukrainians felt no pressure. there is no pressure evidence. of course we've already had testimony about how they did feel pressure and they did not want to be drawn into this political campaign. use over and over in these text messages and e-mails, you go first you announce, no you go first. and we are supposed to believe they felt no pressure? and there it is, it breaks out and open the military aid is being withheld, and there is a connection between the holding of the military aid and these investigations. and the first thing they are asking about, is they send the article and what is happening to this aid? they are ready to com

mr. yermak and tested ambassador volker with the link and ask about the report. in other words, as soon as the ukrainians learned about the hold they asked about it. adam schiff said something during the more than 21 hours that he and his team spoke that i actually agree with. which is when he talked about common sense. many of us at the table and in the room. >> senate impeachment trial resumes at 1:00 o'clock eastern and we made this portion from saturday taking you life to capitol hill with a briefing by democrats. >> i could use a little water. >> good morning, everybody. over a month ago we said hearing from witnesses and hearing documents is the bare minimum for a fair trial. since then the imo's were released that said there was clear direction from the president to hold the military assistance. , the gao concluded that the president broke the law in doing so. and new information from this revealed the plot to remove the u.s. ambassador. yen now, according to the new york times, ambassador bolton wrote in his book that he was ordered by the president to co

mr. yermak that i believed that the resumption of u.s. aid would likely not occur until ukraine took some kind of action on the public statement that we had been discussing for many weeks. >> you see, this wasn't just an internal scheme among the president's top advisers. president trump through his agents communicated the quid pro quo clearly to ukraine. ambassador sondland told president zelensky's top aide on september 1st that ukraine would not get the military aid unless it announced the investigations. this, my senate colleagues, is the very definition of a quid pro quo. but other witnesses know it too. morrison watched sondland's conversation with yermak and then received an immediate readout from sondland after that meeting. morrison urgently reported the interaction to ambassador bolton on a secure phone call. and of course bolton told him to go tell the nsc lawyers. morrison did as he was instructed. he also told ambassador taylor. ambassado ambassador taylor then confronted sondland. taylor texted, quote, are we now saying a wh

mr. yermak and tested ambassador volker with the link and ask about the report. in other words, as soon as the ukrainians learned about the hold they asked about it. adam schiff said something during the more than 21 hours that he and his team spoke that i actually agree with. which is when he talked about common

yermak. here's ambassador sondland. >> i first communicated with mr.liani in early august, several months later. mr. giuliani emphasized that the president wanted a public statement from president zelensky committing ukraine to look into the corruption issues. mr. giuliani specifically mentioned the 2016 election including the dnc server and burisma as two topics of importance to the president. >> giuliani exerted significant influence in this process. in fact when in august 4th yermak inquiried against about the presidential meeting, ambassador volker turned not to the national security counsel staff or to the state department to arrange it and follow up, he turns to giuliani again. volker told yermak he would speak with giuliani later that day and would call the ukrainian president's aide afterward. volker text giuliani to ask about the meeting and set up the call he mentioned to yermak. giuliani replies that the meeting with yermak was excellent and that he would call later. phone records obtained show a 16 minute call on august 5th between ambassad

yermak. here is ambassador sondland. >> i first communicated with mr. giuliani in early august, several months later. mr. giuliani emphasized that the president wanted a public statement from president zelensky committing ukraine to look into the corruption issues. mr. giuliani specifically mentioned the 2016 election, including the dnc server, and burisma as two topics of importance to the president. >> giuliani exerted significant influence in this process. in fact, when on august 4th yermak inquired again about the presidential meeting and ambassador colver turned not to the national security council staff or to the state department to arrange it and follow up, he turned to giuliani again. volker told yermak he would speak with giuliani later that day and call the ukrainian president's aide afterwards. volker then text giuliani to ask abo about the madrid meeting and set up the call. giuliani replies that meeting with yermak was excellent and he would call later. phone records obtained by the committee show a 16-minute call on august 5th between amba

mr. kent's testimony shows that. he said, quote, yermak was very uncomfortable when this was raised with him and suggested if that were the case, if that were really the position of the united states, it should be done officially and put in writing. and this wasn't the only time. on august 13, mr. yermak asked ambassador volker, quote, were there any requests had ever been made by the united states to investigate election interference in 2016. now this makes sense. normally, if something is actually about official u.s. policy, the president would go through official u.s. channels. but as we've seen here, he didn't. his personal attorney made this. this wasn't about foreign policy. it was something that would benefit president trump personally. yet administration officials made this clear too. there were undisputed testimony that the investigations were not part of u.s. policy. in fact, they diverged with the u.s. national security and our nation's values. and the department of justice has made this crystal clear in public statements. they

mr. yermak texted him with the article and asked about the reports. nerd, as soon as ukrainians learned about the hold, they asked about it. now, mr. schiff said something during the 21 hours, or more than 21 hours, that he and his team spoke, that i actually agree with. which is, when he talked about common sense. many of us at the tables and in the room are former prosecutors. at the state, federal or military level. prosecutors talk a lot about common sense. common sense comes into play right here. the top ukrainian official said nothing. nothing at all to their u.s. counter parts during all of these meetings about the pause on security assistance. then, boom. soon as the politico article comes out, suddenly, in that first intense week of september, in george kent's words, security assistance was all they wanted to talk about. what must we conclude if using common sense? that they didn't know about the pause until the politico article on august 28th. no activity before, article comes out, flurry of activity. that's common sense. and it's absolutely

mr. yermak texted volker with a link to the article to ask about the report. in other words, as soon as the ukrainians learned about the hold, they asked about it. now, mr. schiff said something during the 21 hours or more than 21 hours that he and his team spoke that i actually agree with, which is when he talked about common sense. many of us at the tables and in the room are former prosecutors at the state, federal or military level. prosecutors talk a lot about common sense. common sense comes into play right here. the top ukrainian official said nothing, nothing at all, to their u.s. counterparts during all of these meetings about the pause on security assistance but then, boom, as soon as the politico article comes out, suddenly, in that first intense week of september in george kemp's words, security assistance was all they wanted to talk about. what must we conclude if we're using our common sense? that they didn't know about the pause until the politico article on august 28th? no activity before, article comes out, flurry of activity. that's common sen

mr. yermak >> that the ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respectinvestigations as a condition of having the aid lifted >> seth: there you go. that's literally a quid pro quo. republicans actually thought calling this guy as a witness would be a good idea they thought he would help their case, but he only made it worse. it's like if you murdered a guy and called his ghost as your witness. "he's the one who killed me! "damn it, ghost! [ laughter ] i thought you were on my side. so after tuesday's hearings, republicans decided to change their argument again a house gop aide described the change of messaging this way, it has gone from "there is no quid pro quo" to "there's a quid and quo but not a pro," to "even if there was a quid pro quo, it's not that bad this is just how things are done you can say it's bad, but it's not impeachable. my god, look how much their argument has changed this would be like if you got pulled over and said, "i wasn't speeding okay, i was speeding everyone speeds. i was late for my job. i work at the hospital and so does my

mr. yermak met with john bolton at the white house. >> and then we knew that the ukrainians would have on their agenda inevitably the question about a meeting. and so as we get through the main discussion we're going into that wrapup phase, the ukrainian mr. danyliuk was asking about a white house meeting and mr. bolton was trying to parry us back. >> he didn't just raise the oval meeting, he raised the meeting on july 21st, the call with president trump again. president zelensky said on july 25th call, i also wanted to thank you for your invitation to visit the united states, specifically washington, d.c. after the july 25th call, the ukrainians continued to press for the meeting, but that meeting never happened. only on september 25th, after the house announced its investigation into the president's misconduct as it relates to ukraine and the existence of a whistle-blower complaint became public did president trump and president zelensky meet face-to-face for the first time. that meeting was on the sidelines of the u.n. general assembly in new york. it was dominated by public release of

mr. andriy yermak when he met with john bolton at the white house. >> in then we knew the ukrainians would inevitably have a question about the meeting. in so as we get to the main discussion, going into other affairs. they would ask about white house meeting. in mr. bolton was trying to hurry us back. >> as you see present zelinski just didn't raise the oval office meeting on his april 21st call, erase the meeting on july 21st, 5th call with president trump again. president zelinski said in the july 25th call, i also wanted to thank you for your invitation to visit the united states specifically washington dc. after the july 25th call the ukrainians continue to press for the meeting. but that meeting never happened. only on september 25th. after the has announced its investigation into the president's misconduct as it relates to ukraine, in the existence of a whistleblower complaint became public, did president trump in president zelinski meet face-to-face. for the first time. that's meeting was on the sidelines of the un general assembly. that was in new york. it was dominated by public

mr. giuliani. on july 10, 2019 andriy yermak the top aide to president zelensky sent a text to ambassador volker about rudy giuliani here do not text the ukrainian officials said this quote thank you for meeting and your clear and logical position. will be great to meet with you before my departure and discuss. i feel that the key for many things is rudy and i'm ready to talk with him at any time. let me repeat that. the key for many things is rudy. so the president used his personal agent to conduct his scheme with ukraine. they were in frequent contact, everyone white house officials and ukrainian officials knew they had no choice but to deal with giuliani. what was mr. giuliani doing that was so important to ukraine? again the evidence is clear. mr. giuliani's focus was to get investigations into president trump's political rifle to help the president's re-election. we have walked through some of the timelines of mr. giuliani's actions in statements about ukraine but let's just lined them up briefly because it makes the story so clear. april 2019 vice president biden officially announced his campai

yermak in the short meeting. based on my previous communication with secretary pompeo, i felt comfortable sharing my concern with mr. andriy yermak. it was a very brief publicized conversation that happened within a few seconds. i told him i believed that the resumption of u.s. aid would likely not occur until ukraine took some kind of action on the public statements that we had been discussing for many weeks. >> you see, this wasn't just an internal schema among the top advisers. president trump through his agents communicated the quid pro quo clearly to ukraine. ambassador sondland told president zelensky's top aide that ukraine would get the military aid unless it announced the distinction. this, my senate colleagues, is the very definition of a quid pr this is the definition of a quid pro quo. other witnesses know it too. the conversation that was received from sondland after the meeting, morrison urgently reported the interaction to ambassador bolton on a secure phone call. and bolton told him to tell the nfc lawyers. he did as instructed and also told ambassador taylor. ambassador taylor confronted sondland,

mr. andriy yermak when he met with john bolton at the white house. >> in then we knew the ukrainians would inevitably have a question about the meeting. in so as we get to the main discussion, going into other affairs. they would ask about white house meeting. in mr. bolton was trying to hurry us back. >> as you see present zelinski just didn't raise the oval office meeting on his april 21st call, erase the meeting on july 21st, 5th call with president trump again. president zelinski said in the july 25th call, i also wanted to thank you for your invitation to visit the united states specifically washington dc. after the july 25th call the ukrainians continue to press for the meeting. but that meeting never happened. only on september 25th. after the has announced its investigation into the president's misconduct as it relates to ukraine, in the existence of a whistleblower complaint became public, did president trump in president zelinski meet face-to-face. for the first time. that's meeting was on the sidelines of the un general assembly. that was in new york. it was dominated by public

mr. yermak? 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. >> and you testified that you were 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 accomplishing what i had been directed to help accomplish, which was giving the president the information he needed to determine that the security assistance could go forward. >> so now there's a whole other wrinkle to it, right? >> there was the appearance of one based on what ambassador sondland represented. >> and you told ambassador taylor about this conversation as well, is that right? >> i reached out to ambassador taylor to schedule a secure phone call. >> you testified that his 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 convers

mr. yermak texted the article to ambassador bolton and asked to speak to him.th somebody finding out about it for the first time. the ukrainians have also made statements that they learned about it the first time and mr. philbin referenced an article that came out yesterday in the "daily beast" which is an interview with mr. danyliuk who is at the time a very high ranking official with the ukrainians, and this is interesting. i am going to read this article, because i think it is important, and i suggest it to the senate if they wish to have something to consider further on this. danyliuk said that he first found out that the u.s. was withholding aid to ukraine by reading the article published on the 28th. and the diplomats including the former minister elena sergol also mentioned it. and so mr. danyliuk said he was surprised and shocked because a couple of days prior to that he had meetings with john bolton and we had extensive discussions and the last thing that i expected to read about is military aid being frozen, danyliuk said. i was trying to get the trut

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. >> and you testified that you were 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 accomplishing what i had been directed to help other accomplish, which was giving the president the information he needed to determine that the security sector assistance could go forward. >> so now there's a whole other wrinkle to it, right? >> there was the appearance to one based on what ambassador represented. >> and you told ambassador taylor about this as well? >> i promptly reached out to schedule a secure phone call. >> and in your deposition, you testified that his 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 conversat

exclusive interview with the bbc‘sjonah fisher in kyiv, andriy yermak, a senior advisor to ukraine's president, has denied they ever felt pressure from mrbiden. i know president zelensky for a long time. it's impossible to press this guy. and it's impossible to make and manage him to make some decisions. he's absolutely independent and a very strong leader. you will have, i'm sure, have been following the trial in the senate very closely and you will have noticed that the discussion that has moved on from the question as to whether there was pressure put on ukraine. pretty much everyone seems to accept that now. the question is rather more whether that was right or wrong and whether it was something that should lead to a president losing theirjob. is it not now time to level with people and explain what pressure ukraine was under, because it's pretty clear you were under some? our position and our principal position of the president zelensky and all our team, we're always very honest, five, six months ago, and today it's absolutely, we keep the same position. your position is still... crosstalk. if you want to ask about... i'm sorry, yo

mr. volker, happened only because the ukrainian government ask to be put in touch with him. volker testified that president zelensky's senior aide andriy yermak approached him to ask to be connected to mr. giuliani. house democrats also rely on testimony that mayor giuliani told ambassadors volker and solid that in his view, to be credible ukrainian statement on anticorruption should specifically mention investigations into 2016 election interference and burisma. but when ambassador volker was asked whether he knew it giuliani was conveying messages that president trump want to convey to the ukrainians, volker said that he did not have that impression. and he believed that giuliani was doing his own communication about what he believed he was interested in. but even more significant than the relied on presumptions, assumptions and unsupported conclusions, is the managers failure to place in any other context mr. giuliani's actual role and exploring ukrainian corruption. to hear their presentation you might think that mayor giuliani had parachuted into the president's orbit in the spring of 2019 for the express purpose of carrying out a politi

the depp sd dd deputy foreign mr is told by yermak, keep this ve cred secret.y don't want this out. she planned to come to washington. they canceled the trip to washington because they don't want this made public. in august, there's an effort to get the investigations announced. that's the only priority for president and his men. so the ukrainians know the aid is withheld. they know they can't get the meeting. they though what the president wants, these investigations, and the ukrainians, like the americans, can add up two plus two equals four. but if they had any question about that, sondland removes all doubt on september 1st in warsaw when sondland goes over after the pence/zelensky meeting, he goes over to yermak and he says that until you announce these investigations, you're not getting this aid. he makes explicit what they already knew. that not just the meeting but the aid, itself, was tied. and on september 7th, sondland tells zelensky directly, the aid is tied to you doing the investigations. and it's at that point on september 7th when zelensky is to

in fact, it was a testimony that was the ukrainians, under andriy yermak asked to be connected to mr. giuliani simply because he was somebody who would provide information to the president. an ambassador volker testified that it was not his understanding and he did not believe that mr. giuliani was carrying out the policy directors but rather in his views, what he thought would be something useful for the ukrainians to convince the president other anticorruption. just wanted to make that point. it is of course, the president policy is always to abide by the law. in london the position to make. it's always to abide by the law and to continue to do so. i think it is worth pointing out that many presidents, starting with presentation president washington, has relied on persons who are a confidant but who are not actually employees of the government to assist in the conduct of foreign diplomacy. president washington relied on others to carry messages insert certain circumstances i believe to the french. fdr, had his confidant who he relied on in certain certain circumstances to be a go-be

in fact, it was a testimony that was the ukrainians, under andriy yermak asked to be connected to mr. giuliani simply because he was somebody who would provide information to the president. an ambassador volker testified that it was not his understanding and he did not believe that mr. giuliani was carrying out the policy directors but rather in his views, what he thought would be something useful for the ukrainians to convince the president other anticorruption. just wanted to make that point. it is of course, the president policy is always to abide by the law. in london the position to make. it's always to abide by the law and to continue to do so. i think it is worth pointing out that many presidents, starting with presentation president washington, has relied on persons who are a confidant but who are not actually employees of the government to assist in the conduct of foreign diplomacy. president washington relied on others to carry messages insert certain circumstances i believe to the french. fdr, had his confidant who he relied on in certain certain circumstances to be a go-be

mr. volker, it happened only because the ukrainian government has to be putt in touch with them. volker testified president zelensky's senior aide, andriy yermak asked to be connected to mayor giuliani. house democrats rely on onstimony that mayor giuliani told ambassador volker and sondland that in his view to be credible a ukrainian statement on anticorruption should specifically mention investigations into 2016 election interference and burisma. but when ambassador volker was asked whether he knew if giuliani was coming into these are his words, conveying messages president trumpon wantd conveyed to the ukrainians, volker said he didn't have that impression. and he believed giuliani was doing his own communication about what he believed he was interested in. more significant than the reliance on presumption and unsupported conclusions. as the failure to place in any context, mr. giuliani's actual role in exploring the ukrainian corruption. to hear the presentation, you might think thatnk mayor giuliai parachuted into the president's orbit in the spring of 2019 for the express purpose of carrying out the political. they have you believe that

mr. yermak texted the article to the ambassador volker and asked to speak with him. that's consistent with someone find out about it for the first time. the ukrainians have also made statements that you learned about it for the first time, and then mr. philbin just referenced an article that came out yesterday in the "daily beast" which was an interview with a very high-ranking defense official with the ukrainians. and this is interesting, and of going to read this article because i think it's important and i suggest it to the city and they wished that something to consider further on this. sasha danyliuk said he first the net u.s. was withholding aid by reading the article published august 28. u.s. officials and ukrainian diplomats including the countries foreign foreign minister has said publicly that he have was where there were problems as early as july. that's the article they've mentioned in the statement the house members have mentioned. i was really surprised and shocked because just a couple of days prior to that i actually have a meeting with john bolton. a