the deal expands taylor morrison ingraphic reach puts it seattle abportland organ and las vegas.he deal gives it a larger footprint in denver, san francisco, austin, l.a. and riverside. it will also expand taylor rrison's reach to the entry level market. right now a 28% of its siness is entry but william lionhare is 54% of that market. >> nef very successfuy been alk to al are appealo entry level rehe at the right place pint in the rht locatio continuing to go further to the fringe market. >> combined 36% of taylor morrison's business will be entry lev. 40% move up and 13 peppers active adult. >> we focus on the sbroe level but i'm actually equally excit about the active adult positions. and the fact that you know we have not been deep i5 a plus market in the west side of the united states. >> and cheryl palmer also told me that timing is just right, as seattle, portland and denver have been going through a reset recently after overheating. prices have settled since and buyers are coming back in. for nightly business report, dian olick in washington. >>> next up, a takeover invol

tell taylor what zelensky told. july 20, morrison told taylor what happened on the trump-zelinski call. august 21, they talked to taylor morrison talks to taylor, , morrison tells taylor what s ondland -- morrison tells taylor what sondland told trump and nowhere is there a homes tells taylor what the president of the united states told sondland. a homes tellsre taylor what the president of the united states told sondland. >> may i answer the question? >> i will let you in a second. 13 conversations from their star witness and he can't remember a call from a guy he works with every single day? why? >> immediately when i went back to the embassy after this lunch on the 26th, i told the deputy chief of mission. i would have told ambassador taylor immediately except he was on the front lines that afternoon. as i testified, i went on my vacation on saturday and came back the following monday and tuesday, i was in the ambassador's office where i referred to the call. in that week plus i was away, it was my assumption the deputy chief of m

taylor? >> well, mr. morrison testified that you relayed a conversation you had with the president in which the president told you no quid pro quo, but president zelensky must go to a microphone and announce these investigations, and that he should want to. similarly, you told ambassador taylor that while the president said no quid pro quo, unless zelensky announced these investigations, they would be at a stalemate, presumably a stalemate over the military assistance. do you have any reason to question those conversations that mr. morrison and ambassador taylor took notes about? >> well, i think it's tied to my text, mr. chairman, because in my text i think i said something to the effect that he wants zelensky to do what he ran on, i believe is transparency, et cetera, et cetera, which was my clumsy way of saying he wanted these announcements to be made. >> again, ambassador, i'm not asking about your text message. i'm asking about what you relayed to ambassador taylor and mr. morrison about your conversation wit

august 21, morrison talks to taylor. september 1 morrison tells taylor what he told more on. rrison tells day slower what sondland told trump and sondland tells taylor what trump tells sondland. nowhere is there a holmes tells taylor what the president of the united states tells sondland. lou: there you are. break more fundraising records. new ferks c records show the rnc, the republican national committee raising 23 million dollars, zero debt. the dnc raising less than $9 million and they have $7 million in debt. a new poll shows impeachment of the president doesn't resonate with voters in a key battleground state. the marquette law school poll shows 53% of registered voters in the state of wisconsin says president trump should not be impeached, compared to 40% who say he should. that same poll find president trump leading all of the top 2020 democrats in wisconsin. i think that's a fairly good sign for the president, don't you? joining us tonight, former reagan political director and political strategist, ed rollins. >> wisconsin is the state trump won last time had not been

taylor. august 22nd, morrison talks to taylor. september 4th, morrison tells taylor about -- morrison tells taylor what he tells trump. september 8th, he tells him what he told -- >> sean: you follow that? that is the democrat's case in a nutshell. that is supposed to be there compelling out evidence. that is why they want to hurt this country, bring this country to the brink of impeachment, because they never got over the fact that donald trump won the election. they never saw it coming. the two witnesses today, auditor train wrecks. one, eight diplomats, named david holmes. yep she claimed, this is not, i'm not making this up. he overheard president trump on a phone call talk about an investigation. on the other end of the phone call was ambassador sondland. he was sitting across the table from sans lens a sondland. holmes did not hear the conversation. his testimony contradicts what the guy actually on the call said. that was supposed to be yesterday's star witness, gordon sonland. that's what the schiff show is now reduced to.

taylor? >> mr. morrison testified that you related a conversation you had with the president in which the president told you no quid pro quo, but president zelensky must go to the microphone and announce these investigations, and that he should want to. similarly, you told ambassador taylor that while the president said no quid pro quo, unless zelensky announced these investigations they would be at a stalemate, presumably a stalemate over the military assistance. do you have any reason to question those conversations that mr. morrison and ambassador taylor took notes about? >> well, i think it's tied to my text, chairman, because in my text, i think i said something to the effect that he wants zelensky to do what he ran on, i believe, is transparency, et cetera, et cetera. which was my clumsy way of saying he wanted -- he wanted these announcements to be made. >> again, ambassador, i'm not asking about your text message. i'm asking about what you relayed to ambassador taylor about your conversations to the

in a little bit later that both tim morrison and ambassador taylor recount but in this september 1st conversation besar taylor also says that testified under oath that you said that president trump wanted selenski in a public box do you recall using that expression yeah goes back to my earlier comment that again coming from the giuliani source because we didn't discuss this specifically with president trump that they wanted whatever commitments ukraine made to be made publicly so that they would be on the record and be held more accountable whatever those commitments were you also testified earlier ambassador taylor rather testified that you told him that you had made a mistake in telling the ukrainians that only the white house meeting was condition on the announcement of the investigations and that in fact everything was including the security assistance do you know ever saying that when i referenced a mistake i what i recall was i thought that a statement made by the new ukrainian prosecutor that these investigations would be started up again or commence would be sufficient to sat

both ambassador taylor's and mr. morrison's testimony about that conversation do you. directly with ambassador taylor about the same phone call. that you spoke to president trump as he had suggested earlier to you. that president zelensky himself. meaning not the prosecutor general. quote clear things up and do it in public unquote. you have any reason to think that ambassador taylor's testimony based on his contemporaneous notes was i don't know if i got that from president trump or i got it from giuliani that's the part i'm not clear. investor tell is quite clear that you said president trump mister morrison is also quite clear that you said president trump. you don't have any reason to dispute there very specific recollections to know if they have notes in a recall that i don't have any reason to dispute it i just personally can't remember where i got it from. ambassador taylor in that same conversation. if president zelensky. president zelensky and andre your mom. although this was not a quid pro quo as the president had very clearly told you. president zelensky. to

yermak , he talks to taylor september 2nd, morrison tells taylor, september 7th, morrison tells taylor what sondland told trump, september 18th, sondland tells taylor what trump told sondland. nowhere is there a "holmes tells taylor with the president of the united states told sondland." >> may i answer that question? >> i'll get to you, i will give you a chance in a second. 13 conversations from from their star witness. you are their closing witness, and he can't remember a call from a guy he works with every single day? maybe, mr. holmes, the take away was that he thought it was no big deal because he already knew. he didn't remember it because we already had the transcript: he didn't remember the -- we had the trump zelensky transcript had been out for two months. >> sir, i believe that when i. >> you are repeatedly bringing this conversation up as you said to everybody when any time there is a talk about ukraine you recall this conversation. maybe it was the transcript -- the call happened on july 25th, that's four months ago. the transcript has been out for two months. maybe the a

taylor? >> well, mr. morrison testified that you related a conversation you had with the president in which the president told you no quid pro quo, but president zelensky must go to a microphone and announce these investigations. and that he should want to. similarly, you told ambassador taylor that, while the president said no quid pro quo, unless zelensky annoue at presumably a. do you have any reason to question those conversations that mr. morrison and ambassador taylor took notes about? >> well, i think it's tied to my text, mr. chairman, because in my text i think i said something to the effect that he wants zelensky to do what he ran on, i believe, is transparency, et cetera, et cetera, which was my clumsy way of saying, he wanted -- he wanted these announcements to be made. >> again, ambassador, i'm not asking about your text message. i'm asking about what you relaid to ambassador taylor and mr. morrison about your conversation with the president. do you have any reason to question their recollection of wh

taylor. september 1st, morrison told taylor what someone toldem morrison about what your h,michael's holland september 7th, morrison tells taylor what sondland told trump and september 8th, sondland tells taylor what trump told sondland. >> sean: you follow that? because that is the democrats' case. that is it in a nutshell. that is supposed to be their t compelling evidence. that is why they want to hurt this country, bring this country to the brink of impeachment because they never got overs the fact that donald trump won the election, they never saw it coming. the two witnesses today, utter train wrecks. one, a diplomat named david holmes. he actually claimed -- this is not -- i'm not making this up, that he overheard president trump on a phone call talk about an investigation on the other end of the phone call with ambassador sondland while this guy was sitting across the table from aon sondland at a bu, loud restaurant, and the call wasn't even on speaker. wow. super hearing now. holmes did not hear the entire conversation. his testimony contradicts what the guy actually on the call sai

ambassador taylor recalls that mr. morrison told ambassador taylor that i told mr. morrison that i conveyed this message to mr. germ on september 20th. this all happens by the way in warsaw where vice president. >> the gentleman's time is expired. guess what they didn't talk about any linkage, either. [gavel] >> time of the gentleman has inspired. ambassador taylor would you like to response. >> i have two responses, thank you. glad to take those questions. let me just say that i don't consider myself a star witness for anything. >> they do. >> no i don't. >> they do. >> i'm responding to your question. >> please don't interrupt the witness. >> i think i was clear about i'm not here to take one side or the other or to advocate any particular outcomes. let me restate that second thing is that my understanding is only coming from people that i talk to. >> we got that. >> we got that. and, i think this clarification from ambassador sondland was because he said he didn't remember this in his first deposition. he wanted to kind of clarify. but i think mr., mr. jordan, the

taylor. october 22nd, september 1st morrison tells taylor what sondland told morrison. and september 7th morrison tells taylor what sondland told trump and september 8th -- no where is there where the president of the united states told sondland. 13 conversations. i'll get to you. i'll give you a conversation in a second. but 13 rveconversations. 13 conversations from their star witness. you're their closing witness and he can't remember a call from a guy he works with every single day. why? >> yes, sir. immediately when i went back to the embassy after this lunch on the 26th i told my direct supervisor i would have told ambassador immediately except he was on the front lines that afternoon. i then went on as they testified my vacation on saturday. came back the following monday and on tuesday i was back in the ambassador's office where i refer to the call in that week plus that i was away, it was my assumption that the deputy chief would have informed other people about the call, as well. so, my recollection is when i did refer to the call in that meeting that ambassad

taylor or mr. morrison to remind you of. it's the central fact, nicolle. again, perhaps analogizing to bank robbers and drug dealers, they only tell you what they think they need to tell you to get out of trouble at the moment. as their stories change, they become less and less valuable. and i think you mentioned this, michael cohen, paul manafort is another example, we see this over and over and over again in federal court -- or i should say in federal prosecutions. it doesn't surprise me that we would see it here too. >> it's interesting, john, the picture in some ways becomes clearer, you have this testimony that sinks up with the testimony provided by bill taylor and morrison which would seem to me -- i'm not a lawyer, but it would seem like cya testimony, you know their sworn testimony from witnesses that involves you. you make sure your account matches theirs. their stories have to match up when they get called before the principal. on the other hand, questions about his credibility now? >> yeah, again, i don't really -- i don't think this is as big

taylor? >> well, mr. morrison testified that you relayed a conversation you had with the president in which the president told you no quid pro quo. but president zelensky must go to a microphone and announce these investigations and that he should want to. similarly, you told ambassador taylor that while the president said no quid pro quo, unless zelensky announced these investigations, they would be at a stalemate. presumably, a stalemate over the military assistance. do you have any reason to question those conversations that mr. morrison and ambassador taylor took notes about? >> well, i think it's tied to my text, mr. chairman. because in my text, i think i said something to the effect that he wants zelensky to do what he ran on, i believe his transparency, et cetera, et cetera. which was my clumsy way of saying he wanted -- he wanted these announcements to be made. >> again, ambassador, i'm not asking about your text message. i'm asking about what you relayed to ambassador taylor and mr. morrison about your c

morrison and ambassador taylor, you informed mr. yermak that they would need to announce these investigations in order to get the aid, did you not? >> mr. yermak was already working on those investigation, on the statement about the investigations. >> and you confirmed for him he needed to get it done if they were going to get the military aid? >> i likely did. >> reporter: mr. morrison, and ambassador tea lar already related a conversation you had with the president following the warsaw meeting. in which president relaid to you there was no quid pro quo but nevertheless,less zelensky went to the mic and announced these investigations, they would be a stalemate over the aid. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> that was an accurate reflection of your discussion with the president? >> well, that email was not artfully written. i'm the first to admit. what i was trying to convey to ambassador taylor after his frantic emails to me and to others about the security assistance, which by the way, i agreed with him. i tla i thought it was

morrison alerted taylor to a push by the president to hold off on military aid for ukraine in exchange for those investigations that's according to two sources familiar with his testimony. those sources also tell us morrison told investigators he was on that july call between president trump and the ukrainian leader and while he said he had concerns, thought there was nothing illegal about it lester. >> hallie jackson tonight. thank you. and a scathing farewell message today from congresswoman katie hill in her final speech on the house floor. apologetic for the scandal that led her to resign but highly critical of what she has called the revenge porn in a culture of dirty politics she says she faced here's jeff bennett. >> i wasn't ready for my time here to come to an end so soon. >> congresswoman resigning in the face of an investigation stemming from allegations she had an inappropriate sexual relationship with one of her congressional staffers hill denies that but admits to a relationship with a member of her campaign. calling it inappropriate but consensual. >> to every little gir

but in his hearing tim morrison confirmed with bill taylor's testimony there was in fact a quid pro quo. and number 9, this is one little piece of evidence buried in the record, you might have missed it. that's the chief of staff to the president mick mulvaney, got up in front of live cameras and just said to 330 million americans of course there was a quid pro quo. >> did he also mention to me in the past the corruption related to the dnc server, absolutely. no question about that. but that's it, and that's why we held up the money. we look back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing he was worried about in corruption with that nation, and that is absolutely appropriate. >> so if the standard for disturbing linda graham who's as loyal to the president in congress as anyone for whatever reason is to show evidence of quid pro quo outside the phone call, then the last two weeks should be very, very disturbing to lindsey graham and everybody else, right? now, that's the crime. i want to talk about the cover-up. and we have some breaking news on that tonight. multiple outl

go i e presiden ambassador sondland said in his deposition where he said ambassador taylor recalls that mr. morrison told ambassador taylor that i told mr. morrison i conveyed this message to warst zelensky. if you can follow that that's the democrat's plan and why they want to impeach the president. that's what we're going to hear in the next couple weeks. no matter how many witnesses they bring in here four facts will not change have not changed will never change. the call shoips no linkage between dollars t th importantly as has been pointed out the ukrainians didn't take any specific action relative to investigation to get the money released. now there is one witness, one witness that they won't bring in front of us. they won't bring in front of the american people. that's the guy who started it all, the whistleblower. mof con, only one gets to know who that person is. only one member of congress has the staff that gets to talk to that person. the rest of us don't. only chairman schiff knows who the is whistleblower is. we will never get the chance to see the whistleblower raise his right hand t

you don't have any reason to dispute both ambassador taylor's and mr. morrison's testimony about that conversation, do you? >> no. >> on september 8th, you then had a conversation directly with ambassador taylor about this same phone call where ambassador taylor said that you confirmed that you spoke to president trump as he had suggested earlier to you, and that president trump was adamant that president zelensky himself, meaning not the prosecutor general, had to, quote, clear things up and do it in public, unquote. you don't have any reason to think that ambassador taylor's testimony based on his contemporaneous notes was correct? >> i don't know if i got that from president trump or i got it from giuliani. that's the part i'm not clear on. >> ambassador taylor is quite clear that you said president trump. mr. morrison is also quite clear that you said president trump. you don't have any reason to dispute their very specific recollections, do you? >> no. if they have notes and they recall that, oi don't have any reason to dispute it. i just don't have notes to

the nsc's senior director, tim morrison corroborated earlier testimony from ambassador bill taylor. morrison testified he was told the president wanted a top ukrainian officials to announce an investigation. a political one that could help president trump in the end, one that withheld u.s. security aid passed by congress. the coup d -- meanwhile, we got a new poll, showing 49% of americans now support impeaching and removing the president, a number that grows slowly, but also a number that's not a majority. >> corrupt politicians, nancy pelosi and shifty adam schiff, and the media are continuing with the derange the impeachment witch-hunt. the word "impeachment" to me is a dirty word. >>> joining mess is charlie savage, "new york times" justice department reporter katie benner, tom nichols from "usa today" hans, it's great to have you on set. how is the white house reacting to this wyche, week 5, compared to, would you say, last weekend? >> in some ways it's the same. what changes is the renu and what he decide to say emphasize. last night we saw him double down, as the democrats are trying

you don't have any reason to dispute both ambassador taylor and mr. morrison's testimony about that conversation, do you? >> no. >> on september 8th you had a conversation about ambassador taylor about the same phone call where ambassador taylor said that you confirm that you spoke to president trump as he suggested earlier to you, and that president trump was adamant that president zelensky himself, meaning that the prosecutor general, had to "clear things up and do it in public." you don't have any reason to think that ambassador taylor's testimony based on his contemporaneous notes were -- >> i don't know if i got that from president trump or i got it from giuliani. that's the part i'm not clear on. >> ambassador taylor is quite clear that you said president trump. mitch morse and is also quite clear that you said president trump. you don't have any reason to dispute their very specific recollections do you? >> know if they have notes and they recall that i don't have any reason to dispute that. >> he also told ambassador taylor in that same conversation that

you don't have any reason to dispute both ambassador taylor's and mr. morrison's recollection about that conversation, do you? >> no. >> on september 8th you then had a discussion directly with ambassador taylor about this same phone call where ambassador taylor said that you confirmed that you spoke to president trump as he had suggested earlier to you and that president trump was add mont that president zelensky himself, meaning not the prosecutor general, had to, quote, clear things up and do it in public, unquote. do you recall -- you don't have any reason to think ambassador taylor's testimony based on his contemporaneous notes was -- >> i don't know if i got that from president trump or i got it from giuliani. that's the part i'm not clear on. >> ambassador taylor is quite clear you said president trump. mr. morrison is very clear you said president trump. you don't have any reason to dispute their recollection, do you? >> no, if they have notes and they recall it, i don't dispute. it. >> you also told ambassador taylor in that same conversation that if pres

ambassador taylor recalls that mr. morrisonold -- again, this is i hereby swear and affirm from gordon sondland. ambassador taylor recalls that mr. morrison told ambassador taylor that i told mr. morrison that i conveyed this message to mr. yermak on -- >> will the hearsay argument defense work for republicans? will it last? where we all want more energy. but with less carbon footprint. can we have both? at bp, we're working every day to make energy that's cleaner and better. and we see possibilities everywhere. too shabby! too much! i can rent this? for that price? absolutely. it's just right! book your just right rental at thrifty.com. it's just right! for all of the heroes who serve us, t-mobile is here to help serve them. that's why we're offering 50% off family lines for military, veterans and first responders. so they can stay connected, on our newest, most powerful signal ever. and now, we are also offering half off our top samsung phones for military, veterans and first responders. our service is just one way we say tha

august 24th, talks to taylor, august 22nd, morrison talks to taylor, august 29th, september 2nd, morrison tells taylor, september 7th morrison tells taylor what sondland told trump, and september 8th, sondland tells taylor what trump told sondland. nowhere is there a holmes tells taylor what the president of the united states told sondland. >> may i answer that question. >> i'll give you a chance in a second, but 13 conversations, 13 conversations from their star witness, you're their closing witness, and he can't remember a call from a guy he works with every single day. why? >> yes, sir. so immediately when i went back to the embassy after this lunch on the 26th, i told my direct supervisor, the deputy chief admission. i would have told ambassador taylor immediately except he was on the front lines that afternoon. i then went on as i testified my vacation on saturday, came back the following monday, and on tuesday, i was back in the ambassador's office where i referred to the call. in that week plus that i was away, it was my assumption that the deputy chief admission would have informe

taylor? >> well, mr. morrisonconversation you had with the president in which the president told you no quid pro quo, but president zelensky must go to the microphone and announce these investigations and that he should want to. similarly, you told ambassador taylor that while the president said no quid pro quo, unless zelensky announced these investigations, they would be at a stalemate, presumably a stalemate over the military assistance. do you have any reason to question those conversations that mr. morrison and ambassador taylor took notes about? >> well, i think it's tied to my text, mr. chairman, because in my text i think i said something to the effect that he wants zelensky to do what he ran on, i believe his transparency, et cetera, et cetera, which was my clumsy way of saying he wanted -- he wanted these announcements to be made. >> again, ambassador, i'm not asking you about your text message, i'm asking about what you relayed to ambassador taylor and mr. morrison about your conversation with the presi

talks to taylor, morrison tells taylor what s ondland -- morrison tells taylor what nowhereold trump and is there a homes tells taylor what the president of the united states told sondland. >> may i answer the conversation -- the question? >> i will let you in a second. 13 conversations from their star witness and he can't remember a call from a guy he works with every single day? why? >> immediately when i went back to the embassy after this lunch on the 26th, i told the deputy chief of issue. i would have told ambassador taylor immediately except he was on the front lines that afternoon. as i testified, i went on my vacation on saturday and came back the following monday and tuesday, i was in the ambassador's office where i referred to the call. in that week plus i was away, it was my assumption the deputy chief of mission would have informed other people about the call as well. my recollection is when i referred to the call, ambassador taylor nodded knowingly as though he had been briefed. i referred to the call and mentioned some of my takeaways from the call. at the tim

. >> ambassador taylor rawlts that mr. morrison told mr. ylor that i told will morrison that it conveyed this message in' presidentr vice president pence's visit to kiev. and this is where you tell me you got your clear understanding. lou: the media tried to change the he script with more hearsay saying a second american official overheard a phone call about investigations about president trump and ambassador sondland. an anonymous person was briefed on what that official says he or she overheard. when it comes to naming an impeachable offense committed by the president. the radical dimms are left with absolutely nothing. as congressman jordan pointed out yesterday, these were their star witnesses. here is congressman john vapt cliff. >> in this impeachment hearing today where we impeach presidents for treason or bribery or high crimes. where is the impeachable offense in that call? are either of you here to assert there was an impeachable oh nerns that call. show it out. anyone? lou: president trump having some fun with that line of questio

august 24th, talks to taylor, august 22nd, morrison talks to taylor, august 29th, september 2nd, morrison tells taylor, september 7th morrison tells taylor what sondland told trump, and september 8th, sondland tells taylor what trump told sondland. nowhere is there a holmes tells taylor what the president of the united states told sondland. >> may i answer that question. >> i'll give you a chance in a second, but 13 conversations, 13 conversations from their star witness, you're their closing witness, and he can't remember a call from a guy he works with every single day. why? >> yes, sir. so immediately when i went back to the embassy after this lunch on the 26th, i told my direct supervisor, the deputy chief admission. i would have told ambassador taylor immediately except he was on the front lines that afternoon. i then went on as i testified my vacation on saturday, came back the following monday, and on tuesday, i was back in the ambassador's office where i referred to the call. in that week plus that i was away, it was my assumption that the deputy chief admission would have informe

as follows i want to look at point number 2 bullet point number 2 2nd sentence vassar taylor recalls that mr morrisontold investor taylor that i told mr morris and i conveyed this message to mr yarmuk on september 1st 21000 in connection with vice president pence's visit to warsaw and a meeting with president selenski this is clarification i mean when we're talking about her tale recalls mr morrison told investor taylor that i told mr morrison that i conveyed this message to mr yarmuk on september 1st 21000 in connection with vice president his visit to warsaw and a meeting with president selenski we've got 6 people having 4 conversations in one sentence and you just told me this is where you got your clear understanding which i mean even though you had 3 opportunities with presidents alinsky for him to tell you you know what we're going to do these investigations you get the aid didn't tell you 3 different times never makes an announcement never tweets about it never does a see an interview besser you were on the call were you president you did listen in present from presidencies call you never talk

taylor. i've also reviewed the opening statement of tim morrison. these two opening statements have refreshed my recollection about certain conversations in early september 2019. the conversations described in ambassador taylor and mr. morrison's opening statements have refreshed my recollections about conversations involving the suspension of u.s. aid. i do now recall a conversation on september 1st in warsaw with mr. yermak," top aide to the ukrainian president. "this brief pull-aside conversation followed a larger meeting involving vice president pence and president zelensky. after that large meeting i now recall speaking individually with 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 testim

morrison and ambassador taylor you informed mr. yermak that they would need to announce the investigations in order to get the aid. >> mr. yermak was already working on the statement about the investigations. >> you confirmed that he needed to get it done if they were going to get the military aid. >> i likely did. >> mr. morrison and ambassador taylor have related a conversation you had with the president following the warsaw meeting in which the president relayed to you that there was no quid pro quo but nevertheless unless zelensky went to the mic and announced these investigations there would be a stalemate over the aid, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> and that was an accurate reflection of your discussion with the president? >> well, that email was not artfully written. i'm the first to admit. what i was trying to convey to ambassador taylor after his frantic emails to me and to others about the security assistance which by the way i agreed with him. i thought it was a very bad idea to hold that money. i finally called

ambassador sondland said in his deposition, he said ambassador taylor recalls mr. morrison told taylor i told morrison i conveyed this to mr. yermak and meeting with president zelensky and if you can follow that that's the democrats plan and why they want to impeach the president. what we're hear over the next couple weeks. that's what we're going to hear. no matter what they do, no matter how many witnesses they bring if here four facts will not change, have not change will never change. the calls shows no linkagethe bidens. president trump and press zelensky both said no linkage, no pressure, no pushing. ukrainians didn't even know the aid was withheld at the time of the phone call and most importantly, pointed out, ukrainians didn't take specific action relative to the investigation to get the money released. now, there is one witness, one witness that they won't bring in front of us, they won't bring in front of the american people and that's the guy who started it all. the whistle-blower. nope. 43 435 members of congress. one person gets to know who that is. one person

the combined stories of tim morrison and bill taylor? che: tim morrison gives credibility to what taylor said. he is saying most of what he said is accurate. the first is he saidno i' concern anything illegal was discussed. then you have william tay sr ths i thought it was crazy military aid was held upca for polimeans associated with the president. you have two people saying we heard the shing but we have different takes on what it means. nick: what we are talking about is the substance of the impeachment proceedings. troops on a partisan vote? lisa: not just high-stakes, high pressure. when you talk aboutemrats, they are thinking about two things. first, trying to stress this as the process, not impeachment itself. second, they are seeing polling move in the direction of impeachment. the majority of americans want an impeachment inquiry to move forward. that's something democrats feel good about. biggest deal was they only lost two of the vulnerable moats, both in major trump districts. that's sll major democrats. coming from the white

you're seeing other builders like taylor morrison which just acquired william lions homes which is goingo grow its footprint and have more in the entry level. it's going to be about the price point and the buyers and what range, whether you're entry level or perhaps the down size baby boomers. >> and kenneth, just pick one stock. your absolute favorite here. >> we still think kbh has the most earnings momentum going into fy20. predicated upon people underestimating the order momentum in the last quarter partly on an easy comp last year is our view. >> kenneth, thank you very much. diana, great to see you. >> thank you. >> when we come back, nike says no thank you to amazon good move? or is the company shooting itself in the foot get it we're going to debate that question plus, when it comes to investing in retail, one of my next guests says go local and he means literally local. he did it himself. personally visiting six of them. he says that should be part of your portfolio he'll give us the names d anthe retailers that he visited. that's coming up in just a little bit "the exchange" wi

selenski should want to do this himself you don't have any reason to dispute both ambassador taylor's and mr morrison's testimony about that conversation do you know on september 8th you then had a conversation directly with ambassador taylor about this same phone call where ambassador taylor said that you confirmed that you spoke to president trump as he had suggested earlier to you and that president trump was adamant that president selenski himself meaning not the prosecutor general had to quote clear things up and do it in public on quote do you recall do you have any reason to think that ambassador taylor's testimony based on his contemporaneous notes was i don't know if i got that from president trump or i got it from giuliani that's the part i'm not clear on well ambassador tel is quite clear that you said president trump mr morrison is also quite clear that you said president trump you don't have any reason to dispute their very specific recollections do you know if they have notes and they recall that i don't have any reason to dispute it i just personally can't remember where i got it from an

say something like a better song and said in his deposition where he said ambassador taylor recalls that mr morrison told investor taylor that i told mr morrison that i conveyed this message to mr yarmuk on september 1st 21000 it connects with vice president pence's visit to warsaw and a meeting with presidents lenski and if you can follow that that's the democrats' plan and why they want to impeach the president that's what we're going to hear over the next couple weeks that's what we're going to hear but no matter what they do no matter how many witnesses they bring in here for facts will not change have not change will never change the call shows no linkage between dollars in the investigation into as more the bidens president trump and president let's give both said on the call there was no linkage there was no pressure there was no pushing ukrainians didn't even know the aid was withheld at the time of the phone call and most importantly as has been pointed out ukrainians didn't take any specific action relative to investigations to get the money released now there is $1.00 witness one witness

. >> ambassador taylor recalls that mr. morrison told ambassador taylor that i told mr. morrison that i conveyed this message to mr. yermak in connection with vice president pence's visit to warsaw. we have six people with four conversations in one sentence and you just told me this is where you got your clear understanding. >> laura: he is the star of the whole hearing. taylor should have started one of the shampoo commercials from the early 80s. >> you'll tell two friends and they'll tell two friends and so on and so on. >> laura: i remember that, that's how bad it is. that brings us to our third take away. the ukraine has done better under trump than obama. that's undeniably true. despite these ludicrous statements to the contrary. >> $400 million of bipartisan taxpayer-funded military support for a nation at war. rules-based order was being threatened by the russians in ukraine. so our security assistance was designed to support ukraine. >> withholding military aid to, does that we can ukraine? >> well, how can democrats even look at themselves in the mirror after say

ambassador taylor recalls that mr. morrison -- this is i hereby swear and affirm from gordon sondland. this all happens, by the way, this all happens by the way in warsaw -- >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> they didn't talk about any linkage either. >> time of the gentleman has expired. would you like to respond? >> two responses. thank you. glad to take those questions. let me just say that i don't consider myself a star witness for anything. >> they do. >> i don't. i'm responding to your question. >> please don't interrupt the witness. >> i think i was clear about i'm not here to take one side or the other or to advocate any particular outcome. let me restate that. second thing is that my understanding is only coming from people that i talked to. >> we got that. >> we got that. and i think this clarification from ambassador sondland was because he said he didn't remember this in his first deposition so he wanted to kind of clarify. i think mr. jordan, the way i read this, he remembers it the sa same way i do. >> and it

taylor. i've also reviewed the opening statement of tim morrison. ction about certain conversations in early september 2019. the conversations described in ambassador taylor and mr. morrison's opening statements have refreshed my recollections about conversations involving the suspension of u.s. aid. i do now recall a conversation on september 1st in warsaw with mr. yermak," top aide to the ukrainian president. "this brief pull-aside conversation followed a larger meeting involving vice president pence and president zelensky. after that large meeting i now recall speaking individually with 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 kn

they will say something like ambassador sondland said in his deposition ambassador taylor recalls mr. morrison told pastor taylor that i told mr. morrison that i convey this message to mr. yermak with connection to the visit to warsaw in a meeting with president zelensky. if you can follow that, that is the democrats plan and why they want to impeach the president. that's what we are going to hear over the next couple weeks. that's what we're going to hear but no matter what they do and how many witnesses they bring in, four facts will not change and they will never change. the call shows no linkage between dollars and the investigation into burisma and the bidens. president trump and president zelensky have both said there was no linkage, no pressure, no pushing. ukrainians didn't know the aide was withheld at the time of the phone call and most importantly as it's been pointed out, the ukrainians didn't take any specific action relative th to e investigation. there is one witness, one witness they won't bring in front of us. they won't bring in front of the american people. that's the guy wh

taylor? chairman schiff: well, mr. morrison testified that you relayed a conversation you had with the president, in which the president told you no quid pro quo, but president zelensky must go to a microphone and announce these investigations and that he should want to. similarly, you told ambassador taylor that while the president said no quid pro quo, unless zelensky announced these investigations, they would be at a stalemate. presumably a stalemate over the military assistance. do you have any reason to question those conversations that mr. morrison and ambassador taylor took notes about? ambassador taylor took notes -- ambassador sondland: well, i think it's tied to my text, mr. chairman, because in my text i think i said something to the effect that he wants zelensky to do what he ran on i believe his transparency, et cetera, et cetera, which was my clumsy way of saying he wanted these announcements to be made. chairman schiff: again, ambassador, i'm not asking about your text message. i'm asking you about what you relay

august 24th, talks to taylor, august 22nd, morrison talks to taylor, august 29th, september 2nd, morrison tells taylor, september 7th morrison tells taylor what sondland told trump, and september 8th, sondland tells taylor what trump told sondland. nowhere is there a holmes tells taylor what the president of the united states told sondland. >> may i answer that question. >> i'll give you a chance in a second, but 13 conversations, 13 conversations from their star witness, you're their closing witness, and he can't remember a call from a guy he works with every single day. why? >> yes, sir. so immediately when i went back to the embassy after this lunch on the 26th, i told my direct supervisor, the deputy chief admission. i would have told ambassador taylor immediately except he was on the front lines that afternoon. i then went on as i testified my vacation on saturday, came back the following monday, and on tuesday, i was back in the ambassador's office where i referred to the call. in that week plus that i was away, it was my assumption that the deputy chief admission would have informe

. >> now, ambassador taylor also testified that -- and mr. morrison both of them testified that you told them that president trump said there was no quid pro quo which you also included in the text message that you referred. but then you went on and they had slight variations as to what you told them, but then you said that to ambassador taylor that president zelenskiy himself not the prosecutor general needed to clear things up in public or there would be a stalemate. and mr. morrison recounted something similar. you don't have any reason to doubt that both of their very similar recollections of the conversations they had with you, do you, ambassador sondland? >> let me break that down, mr. goldman. the text as i said about the no quid pro quo was my effort to respond to ambassador taylor's concerns to go to president trump apparently ambassador taylor had access to secretary pompeo. he did not have access to president trump so i made the phone call. i said what do you want? president trump responded with what i put in the text. and then i strongly e