they know what's in present zielinski news mind better than president zielinski does.resident zielinski said he felt no pressure. that's managers tell you they know better. and this is really a theme of the house case. i want you to remember this. every time the democrats say the president trump made demands are issued a quid pro quo to present zielinski on the july 25 call, they are saying that president zielinski and his top advisers are being untruthful. and they acknowledge what they aret saying. they center the past few days. tell me how that helps u.s. foreign policy and national security to say that about our friends. we know there was no quid pro quo on the call. we know that from the transcripts. call is not the only evidence that there was no quick broke well. there could have possibly been it quick broke well because the ukrainians did not even know that the security assistance was on hold until it was reported in the media by politico at the end of august. more than a month after the jul. think about this, the democrats accused the president of leveraging s

iranian authorities wish to keep the black boxes in iran but have indicated to president zielinski ofing to share such information was we are calling for a complete and credible investigation with international partners so we can uncover the facts of what happened. for the families affected and for the world. circling back to an earlier question, if the intelligence is accurate, this seems to be the end result of the sequence of events that was caused by the drone strikes caused by the us president, give the information you have, how much responsibility does the united states bear for this tragedy? the evidence suggests that this is the likely cause but we need to have a full complete incredible investigation to establish exactly what happened. that is what we are calling for and that is what we're expecting will happen. if iran does not co—operate and there are some reports of minimal cooperation to this point, what pressure can you bring to bear for sanctions, economic reproductions —— repercussions? what can be done? we will contemplate them as this unfolds but will continue to wor

forget we have the transcript, tough as it may be of the phone call between president trump and zielinskixhibit a in tums erms o showing the solicitation of the special favors, which is the announcement of the investigation into biden, and then you also have the claim that hillary's server would disprove russian interference in the election. this comes from the rough transcript itself corroborated by multiple witnesses who testified before the house committee and the full house about statements that the president made directly to them or were overheard in other conversations and statements made through rudy guiliani that corroborate exactly what the president intended when he had that conversation with president zielinski. this is classically the way prosecutors build their cases and i don't want to make the analogy too close because this is a political process impeachment, and it's not part of a judicial process that we are used to in this country when it comes to actual criminal law. >> so on that note, and you led me right into my question to you, the main takeaway argument that the pr

is zielinski gonna do the investigation? and sunderland says, yes he will do anything you want. he loves your. this the extent of his interest in the ukraine and they go on to talk about other things and then they hang up and david holmes turns to the ambassador and says, and language i will have to modify , to remove an expletive. he says something along the lines of does th the president give a blank about ukraine? and sunderland says no he doesn't give a blank about ukraine. he only cares about the big stuff like the investigation of the bidens that giuliani once. this is a million-dollar donor to the trump inaugural. admitting the president doesn't care about ukraine he doesn't care whether they get militarily dollars to defend themselves he doesn't care what position zelensky goes into in these investigations. he doesn't care about that. isn't that clear? it's a why he didn't care about corruption in 2017 or 2018. and he certainly didn't care about in 2019, all he cared about was the big stuff that affected him personally. like this investigation that he wanted of the biden

the president never mentioned corruption on their call with president zielinski.let's go through the evidence. as we just discussed, dod had already completed a review and concluded that ukraine had "made sufficient progress in meeting defense reform and anticorruption goals consistent with the national defense authorization act in order to receive the funds. and mark sandy who is not at that meeting but initially responsible for approving the hold said he had never heard corruption as a reason for the hold in all of the discussions he had about it. similar to anticorruption argument there was simply no evidence to support the presidents after the fact agreement that he was concerned about burden sharing. that's other countries also contribute to train i imagine the president might cite the emails in june about what deoth countries provided to ukraine the reference to other countries contribution in the july 25 call and testimony from sandy about request for information about what other european countries give to ukraine. but there is simply no evidence that ties

but zielinski, need to go to the mic. and he should want to do it. which is equivalent of saying, no quid pro quo except a quid pro quo. an easy-going market niche and want to do it. that is there alibi. they didn't also mention of course, that we have a real child. ambassador solomon also said, that when asked if there was a quid pro quo the answer is yes there was a quid pro quo. there was an absolute quid pro quo. and once more when it king to the military aid, it was as simple as two plus two. so i will tell you something. we're not the only people who can add two plus two. there are millions of people were watching this who can add up to close to also. when the president tells his chief of staff were rolling at the end because of this is the cheapest step admitted, when the president gives a possible or other explanation for holding a paid, that you all and we all supported and voted on the very bipartisan way has no explanation for it. he only brings up the correction he wants to bring about. it doesn't take those genius, it doesn't take albert

that is come zielinski had to go to the mic to answer these, announce these investigations. and, of course, all the other circumstance evidence, the fact of the legitimate reason for holding the aide, the fact that all the nice kitty staff all of his advisers and other secretaries were urging that it be released, the uncontradicted evidence is the simplest 2+2=4. nevertheless, the president's lawyers sought to contest this charge. and now that they have, they cannot dispute the relevance and the importance of john bowles testimony. so ought to come in, test went under oath. senators should not wait until march 17 when the book comes after they should demand this information while it would still be pertinent to the decision. >> republican argue if you so relevant and so forth then you should push harder for it over on the house side. knowing what you know now and what you're seeing in the supporting about the book do you regret not doing? >> no, because what that arguments about you and bear in mind we did use that approach with other witnesses like don mcgahn. it is now more

zielinski, but today were supposed to believe him. and in spite of the history, where seven important things that he had exactly wrong. so when he talks about presumption, and when congressman turner under oath at the hearing, if that is the kind of game that they are playing here and again i think the american people see through it all. >> was the wrong to no republicans in the deposition. almost every saying interview. >> they subpoenaed every saying witness. they kicked out all of kinds of numbers. then they say that chairman nadler says last night, he used the term cover up. [inaudible conversation] >> the cover-up, are you kidding me. you all covered it. the distinction is the president's counsel wasn't present. so look at what happened in the nixon inpatient. this 1608 days from the time the inquiry started in the resolution starting the impeachment inquiry until the articles of impeachment were marked up in the judiciary committee. president nixon's counsel was allowed to participate all 11608 days. the same thing from clinton

president selenski top aide by text less than 30 minutes before the phone call between trump and zielinski and again we're talking about july 25th in a text 30 minutes before the trump zelinsky phone call here's what is said with volcker texting under a year mark a top aide to presidents alinsky good lunch thanks heard from white house assuming president z. convinces trump he will investigate quote get to the bottom of what happened unquote in 2016 we will nail down day for a visit to washington good luck see it tomorrow kurt well that those words can be much clearer suman presidency convinces trump he will investigate get to the bottom of what happened in 2016 will nail down a visit to washington that's a text 30 minutes before that call counsel for the president like you think this is just about that call you don't get to look outside the 4 corners of that call they don't want you look at the months that went into preparing for that call or the months of pressure that followed it but you can just look at. right now what happened 30 minutes before that call in this text message heard from

. >> in the transcript does the te president not ask zielinski to look intosk the bidens? >> i can only tell you what i was thinking at the time. that is not what i understood the president to be dick. >> do you believe in your opinion that the president of the uniteden states demanded tht president zelensky undertake these investigations? >> no, sir. >> and you didn't hear the president make a demand,em did you? >> no, sir. >> again there were no demands from your perspective? >> that is correct. >> is it fair to say as you were listening to thes call you not thinking the president bribing the president of ukraine, that never crossed your mind? >> it did not. >> or he was extorting the president of ukraine or doing anything improper? >> correct, sir. >> significantly, the ukrainian government never raised any concerns about the july 25 call. just hours after the call the ambassador william taylor, head of u.s. mission in ukraine, had dinner with the thin secretary of the ukrainian national security and defense counsel who seem to think that the call went fine, the call we

third, president zielinski and high-ranking security officials did not know the assistance was pausedfter the call. and not a single witness testified linked investigations to the security assistance phaetdi meeting or anything else. a presidential meeting took place on september 25th without the ukrainian government, without ukrainian tkpwufgovernm announcing any investigations. finally in the blind drive to impeach the president, president trump, in reality, strategically has been the best friend and supporter of ukraine certainly in our recent history. these are the facts. that is what is before you. deputy white house council will now address additional facts related to these proceedings. thank you. >> mr. chief justice, members of the senate, good afternoon. mr. leader, i believe we will be ready to take a break at the conclusion of my remarks if it meets with your approval. on saturday we walked through some of the evidence that the house managers put forward and didn't put forward during their 21-plus hours of presentation. the evidence that we recounted was drawn directly from

zielinski's top aide flew to madrid and meets with rudy giuliani. represented the president's interests. both giuliani, they walk away from this meeting in madrid clearly understanding that a white house meeting is linked to zelensky's announcement of the investigation. in separate conversations with giuliani after this meeting, he said he learned that giuliani wanted the ukrainians to issue a statement. specific mentions for the two investigations. according to his testimony, he told him that his meeting was very good. immediately he added that the ukrainians asked for a meeting in december. he presses him on the white house meeting date, saying he was waiting for confirmation. maybe you know the date. this is a recurrent theme that we have seen through the text messages and other documents. that is the recurrent request for this meeting by the ukrainians because it was so important. giuliani's objective was clear to ambassador volker and ambassador sondland. >> martha: we will take a quick break here and we will be back with live coverage. when we

but zielinski, need to go to the mic. and he should want to do it.hich is equivalent of saying, no quid pro quo except a quid pro quo. an easy-going market niche and want to do it. that is there alibi. they didn't also mention of course, that we have a real child. ambassador solomon also said, that when asked if there was a quid pro quo the answer is yes there was a quid pro quo. there was an absolute quid pro quo. and once more when it king to the military aid, it was as simple as two plus two. so i will tell you something. we're not the only people who can add two plus two. there are millions of people were watching this who can add up to close to also. when the president tells his chief of staff were rolling at the end because of this is the cheapest step admitted, when the president gives a possible or other explanation for holding a paid, that you all and we all supported and voted on the very bipartisan way has no explanation for it. he only brings up the correction he wants to bring about. it doesn't take those genius, it doesn't take albert e

remember what he does, he starts off in his opening argument lying about the phone call with president zielinski, he was really unreal. just flat-out lying about the transcripts about the phone calls. then what he would but as he do then. he said he has no idea that was a lower is. then when we find out, his team has been basically coaching was a lower is not a real whistleblower by the way of course. the informant, then later. now this is the guy, is going to code over and for this and present the case to the united states and in print has saying that he has evidence on russia collision. he had the war evidence more did. i can't believe they made him the house manager. ended with a straight face. judge jeanine: but i went really want to talk about the sense of the president. i have read it all. i think that it is fascinating because it is very clear that it's not only the presence responses that and trying to change 2016, they are trying to impact the 2020. they don't have the right to do that but the one that i thought was most interesting as a lawyer obviously, is that it is factually insuffi

he was going after it generally is chief political rival, first in thee polls, he was pressuring zielinski to make the announcement.it i kind of laugh at the title of the book, what trump doesn't want you to know is the tax returns.s. everybody else releases their tax returns. >> thank you. >> i didn't really hear a question. i would like to know what his opinion is about then vice president joe biden actually strong-arming and promising to withhold aid if federal prosecutor in the ukraine was not fired. it seems to be sort of gamesmanship par for the course in washington d.c. joe biden was doing this at a time when his son was being paid millions of dollars to sit on the board of an energy company. again, i think the president has acquitted himself well on this issuee. the president has broad powers when it comes to foreign aid. this is an issue in court ukraine that you have asked corruption. government has mismanaged funds so again, president who has governed and as he campaigned, saying he would be a steward of taxpayer dollars, $400 million in aid to i ukraine, i think any good states

zielinski did when his own people to know the the presidef the train was holding back aid from him. what does that look like for a new president of ukraine who was tied to make the case that he's going to be able to defend his own country because he is such a great relationship with the great patron of the united states? he didn't want ukrainians to know about it. he didn't want the russians to know about it for the reasons we talk about earlier. so i guess the ukrainians kept it close to the vest. now, mr. purpura also went on to say the ukrainians say they don't feel any pressure that's what they say now. of course we know that's not true. we've had testimony thatwe they didn't want to be used as a political pawn in u.s. domestic politics. they resisted it. you will hear more testimony about that about the efforts to push back on this public statement, how they tried s to water it down, try to leave out thefi specifics and out speedede believe this portion of yesterday since impeachment trial to go live to capitol hill to hear from senate republicans holding a news briefing ahead

the plane was headed to kiev where president zielinski had a memorial yesterday. >> we were surely find out the truth. a thorough independent investigation will be conducted according to international laws. >> as i said, former officials with the faa and transportation safety board says that a fire is unlikely the cause given how fast the plane went down, and on the brie field, the plane broke up before hitting the ground. they say that a missile strike top to the possibilities. canada is calling for a transparent investigation. a 63 of the victims were canadian citizens. and most headed back after a connection in kiev. the question is does iran have the expertise to examine the black boxes, and if not, which country will do it? harris. >> harris: dan springer, thank you. we will have more on the breaking news story in the hour i will talk with an aviation safety consultant and former pilot mike boyd. watch for that. this is also developing this hour. the house is poised to begin debate on a war powers resolution to limit president trump's action on iran. new sanctions on iran are in pl

over with lev parnas and the indicted associate of rudy giuliani, this was nowhere he says to get zielinskie of all of this? >> very shady characters. it might be, one possibility is that they want to use the evidence in the trial and the other possibility is that it's not going to be a big thing. what's interesting here is from a storytelling point of view, we are about to go back to square one because a lot of the senators have been doing other stuff the last few months and they have not been following the developments in this impeachment case on a minute-by-minute basis like people in the house or people in the press have been doing. the house managers and the president's defenders are going to have to go back to square one and it'll actually be good to hear all of this fresh from the start. >> bret: to your point, how much of the american public is following the minutia i in the back-and-forth? >> i do not think they have the time. they want to be productive. as much as we can give the factual information, i think that's a really important job because i remember it getting pretty ugly a

was no case that the evidence presented was perfectly acceptable in the phone call with president zielinskierfect phone call and on the other hand, that there was not enough evidence even if you took all that evidence even if you took all that evidence and assumed the worst, it would not constitute a crime because no crime has been committed in their opinion if you have not committed a crime that is not an impeachable offence. their legal defence strategy is through a lot of things up strategy is through a lot of things up against the wall and see what sticks it as long as enough senators byatt, they're going to be just fine. home interest understand the format. these democrats in the house of representatives make their case and many senders listen and draw a conclusion as that the idea? that is the way the rules are set out. this was to serve as impartialjurors and specific term they're talking about is, they took a pledge to that effect and that the democrats will make their case over three days and then donald trump hospitals legal defence team will have their chance to defend the presid

official acts of great importance that coveted white house meeting to which the president you look zielinski had already been invited and 391000000 in military assistance ukrainian had to fight the russians. for strategic partner of the united states in a hot war with a russian backed forces inside its own borders the symbolic support conferred on it by an oval office visit with the president of the united states and the lifesaving support of our military aid was essential as the house is presentational make clear and directly soliciting foreign interference and withholding those official acts in exchange for the announcement of political investigations beneficial to israel lection the president put his own interests above the national interests present trump undermine the integrity of our free and fair elections by pressing a foreign power to influence our most sacred right as citizens our right to freely choose our leaders and he threatened our national security by withholding critical aid from a partner on the front lines of war with russia an aggressor that has threatened peace and stabi

i think what is most important about the transcript was his staying to presidents zielinski, i need avor. the favor was to get some dirt on biden news son and derivatively on biden. and that was the important part of the trip. we have a parade it is really made the whole soap lower complaint irrelevant because the whistleblowers reporting and others told him occurred in the telephone conversation we have perhaps an incomplete but a significant enough transcript so we know what was said. another smith of their evidence through this process that we question. which i think is very important to the public. >> thank you. >> ricer thank you for joining us. with regard to frequent litigator, words to the library about abusive process and serial litigator yet get permission from the quote to sue. in these defenses have they ever been proposed and this first question. the second question, we are dealing with roy, probably properly a professional response and obligate advocacy for your client. so have those issues been addressed. >> will we are required advocacy and the other one was disbarred

zielinski must publicly announce the political investigations and he should want to do it. no quid pro quo except this quid pro quo. sondland relayed the message to president zelensky, informing that without the announcement of the political investigations, they would be at a stalemate. sondland made clear this reference to a stalemate meant the release of the security assistance. president zelensky, after hesitating for weeks to join the president's corrupt scheme, finally relented. president zelensky informed sondland that he agreed to do a cnn interview and sondland understood he would use that occasion to mention these items, meaning the two investigations at the heart of the scheme. the candidate zelensky who was swept into office with a landslide victory on a promise of fighting corruption would be forced to undertake just the same kind of corrupt act he had been elected to clean up. upon learning this, ambassador taylor called sondland to register his deep concern, telling him that it was crazy, crazy. taylor later texted sondland to reinforce the point "as i sat on

conducted, everything that matter was the public announcement, as this note says with an asterisk, get zielinski to announce that the biden case will be investigated. and in early september after mr. giuliani and a bachelors bulk when sondland had tried but failed to get president zelensky to issue a public statement, president trump made this clear himself. he explained to ambassador bolton that he wanted zelenski in a public box. that is, president trump would only be satisfied if zelenski made a public announcement of the investigations, which he subsequently agreed to do on cnn. here's ambassador taylor's testimony on this. >> so even though president trump was saying repeatedly that there is no quid pro quo, ambassador sondland relate to you that the facts of the matter were that the white house meeting at the security assistance were conditioned on the announcement of these investigations, is that your understanding? >> that's my understanding. >> now, you reference a television interview, and a desire for president trump to put zelenski in a in a public , which you also have in quotes. wa

obvious that we have enough evidence to suspect president trump of doing what he did in pressuring zielinski. the main thing here is that the people here have firsthand knowledge, president has locked them. i find it very hard to swallow. when somebody knows what the conclusion is. >> john are you a lawyer. >> no, just been watching this very closely. >> do you see convincing evidence that in your view, the president is guilty in should be impeached. >> i think it's very clear that based on what of all of the investors in career people had to say, it is very clear that trump did with the aid held. but no one heard it directly. so we need to get the people in. . . . . . coco understand why people make that argument because it seems like they had an opportunity but the thing is they took the opportunity with don mcgahn and the litigation resulting from doing that

news much to their surprise and finally have the new president zielinski elected last april who finds himself in a surprising group of political forces. one last thought i wanted to leave you with that in july of 2014 when the -- crimea had just been annexed and the war in the southeast had just started and you may remember the malaysian airliner that was fine from the netherlands and was shot down by russian heavy artillery and fell to the earth and all passengers and crew perished. ukrainians response to that was to europe that we have literally been dying to become part of europe. you've been ignoring us. maybe now you will pay attention because he see it's not that far away. it's not that disconnected. i would submit to you that the trump impeachment problems may be the united states version of the m817. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you all for being here. i want to thank my co- okun iser, monica, and my fellow panelists and thank my -- thinker especially for encouraging me at the kind of last-minute to help organize this hot topic. it is so hot that even i the hour th

is zielinski gonna do the investigation? and sunderland says, yes he will do anything you want. he loves your. this the extent of his interest in the ukraine and they go on to talk about other things and then they hang up and david holmes turns to the ambassador and says, and language i will have to modify , to remove an expletive. he says something along the lines of does th the president give a blank about ukraine? and sunderland says no he doesn't give a blank about ukraine. he only cares about the big stuff like the investigation of the bidens that giuliani once. this is a million-dollar donor to the trump inaugural. admitting the president doesn't care about ukraine he doesn't care whether they get militarily dollars to defend themselves he doesn't care what position zelensky goes into in these investigations. he doesn't care about that. isn't that clear? it's a why he didn't care about corruption in 2017 or 2018. and he certainly didn't care about in 2019, all he cared about was the big stuff that affected him personally. like this investigation that he wanted of the biden

trump raised the cloud strike theory one month later during his july 25 call with the president zielinski. of course, as has been said many times, that theory has been completely refuted by u.s. intelligence agencies as well as the president's own hand-picked senior advisers. "the new york times" also reported on june 27 mick mullaney sent blair an e-mail. he wrote i'm trying to tie up loose ends and did we ever find out about the money for ukraine and whether we can hold it back? what was blair's response to mulvaney that it was possible told the security assistance but blair warned expect congress to become unhinged. now, blair who previously worked for congress knew that congress would be unhinged because there was overwhelming, bipartisan support for ukraine. congress had already authorized the release of the funds. dod had already told congress and the world that it would send the 250 million on ukraine security assistance and it had already started to do so. mark sandy, senior career official at omb responsible for this type of aid cannot recall any other time in his 12 year career

including president zielinski himself via text message and whatsapp about the president's improper demands and how ukrainian officials would respond to them based on the testimony we received and on evidence that has since emerged all of these documents. and others that we will describe. bare directly on the allegations set forth in the first article of impeachment. they would help complete our understand i understanding of how the president's scheme unfolded in realtime. they would support the conclusion that senior ukrainian officials understood the corrupt nature of president trump's demand. they would further expose the extent to which senior trump administration officials were aware of the president's plot and helped carry it out. we're not talking about a burdensome number of documents, we're talking about a specific discrete set of materials held by the state department. documents the state department has already collected in response to our subpoena but has never produced. we know these materials exist. we know they are relevant and we know the president is desperately trying to co

separately, in a text message to politico, giuliani alleges the original offer with the omeeting of zielinski was a set up. he said it is a set up orchestrated by several local critics of president trump who were advising zelinski. giuliani declared he is in the hands of president trump that giuliani had not stopped trying. to the senior aide may 11th you asked for a meeting that later made it clear giuliani was representing president trump as a private citizen and working with presidents trump knowledge and consent. and it reads in my capacity as personal counsel for president trump and with his knowledge and consent, i request a meeting with you on this upcoming monday, may 13, or tuesday may 14. i will need no more than an hour of your time and i will be accompanied by my colleague , a distinguished american attorney who is very familiar with this matter. but it did not appear that the attempt to get the meeting was working. that same day giuliani sent a text saying this guy is cancelingli the meeting i think. approximately three hours later he sent a draft of a public statement that peopl

zielinski. he campaigned on a platform and rooting out corruption in his current country. his pledge was welcomed by the united states and its allies. the new government also threatened the work of president trump's chief agent in ukraine, rudy giuliani. president zaleski was taking power, mr. giuliani was already engaged in an effort to convince ukrainian officials to announce to sham investigations. the first was an effort to smear former vice president joe biden. the second was designed to undermine the intelligence community unanimous assessment that russia interfered in the 2016 election. one obstacle to mr. giuliani news work, was ambassador jovanovich. in 33 years veteran of the foreign service, and master has partnered with ukraine to write about the kind of corruption that would've allowed mr. giuliani lies divorce. in order to complete his vision, mr. giuliani first needed ambassador out of the way. and so in early 2019, mr. giuliani as their campaign against the ambassador printed an effort that involved mr. johnny's allies in ukraine. .-ellipsis that scheme beg

readout of the pensive zelinski meeting over the phone from jennifer meeting in which he told me zielinskid the meeting by immediately asking the vice president about the security cooperation. vice president did not response obstinately but said he would talk to president trump that night. the vice president did say that he wanted the europeans to do more to sit or ukraine and he ukraine to do more to fight corruption. >> on september 11, based on the information collected and presented to president trump, the president lifted the pause on the security assistance. as mr. morrison explained, our process gave the president the confidence he needed to approve the release of the security sector assistance. the house managers say that the talk about corruption and burden sharing is a ruse, no one knew why the security assistance was paused, no one is addressing the president's concerns with burden sharing and corruption. the house managers own evidence, their own record tells a different story, however. they did not tell you about this. not in 21 hours, why not? the president's concerns were ad

trump raised the cloud strike theory one month later during his july 25 call with the president zielinski. of course, as has been said many times, that theory has been completely refuted by u.s. intelligence agencies as well as the president's own hand-picked senior advisers. "the new york times" also reported on june 27 mick mullaney sent blair an e-mail. he wrote i'm trying to tie up loose ends and did we ever find out about the money for ukraine and whether we can hold it back? what was blair's response to mulvaney that it was possible told the security assistance but blair warned expect congress to become unhinged. now, blair who previously worked for congress knew that congress would be unhinged because there was overwhelming, bipartisan support for ukraine. congress had already authorized the release of the funds. dod had already told congress and the world that it would send the 250 million on ukraine security assistance and it had already started to do so. mark sandy, senior career official at omb responsible for this type of aid cannot recall any other time in his 12 year career

the prosecutor had been fired, which affected anticorruption efforts in the ukraine, and president zielinski respond by saying the issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty, so we will take care of that. and he is explaining he understands that it'sen issue that has to do with, was an investigation there, over there their prosecutor was handling, derailed in a way that affected their anticorruption efforts and it's something worth looking into. it's the president making clear that we're not saying that is offlimits. sounds bad to the u.s. as well. but let me get more specifically to the question, is there any situation where it might be legitimate to ask for an investigation overseas. yes, if there was a conduct by a u.s. person overseas that potentially violated the law of that country, but didn't violate the law of this country, but there was a national interest in having information but that and understanding what went on, then it would be perfectly legitimate to suggest this is something worth looking into. we have an interest in k