>> HE WAS VERY TRANSPARENT.
I DON'T KNOW THERE WAS A SINGLE
QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED TODAY
THAT HE DIDN'T ANSWER.
AND ANSWER FULLY, WHICH IS
UNIQUE.
AND WHAT WE DO KNOW IS THERE
WAS DEFINITELY NO QUID PRO QUO.
I MEAN, IT CAME OUT OVER AND
OVER.
IT WAS ASKED PROBABLY 20
DIFFERENT TIMES.
>> Sandra: REPUBLICANS AND
DEMOCRATS CLASHING OVER
YESTERDAY'S CLOSED DOOR
INTERVIEW WITH FORMER U.S.
ENVOY TO UKRAINE KURT VOLKER.
HE HANDED OVER DOZENS OF PAGES
OF TEXT MESSAGES SHOWING HIM
AND OTHER DIPLOMATS ARGUING IF
PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS PUSHING
UKRAINE TO INVESTIGATE HIS
POLITICAL RIVAL.
LEE ZELDIN IS A MEMBER OF THE
HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE.
YOU WERE IN THE ROOM YESTERDAY.
WHAT WAS YOUR BIGGEST TAKEAWAY.
>> I DIDN'T KNOW AMBASSADOR
VOLKER BEFORE YESTERDAY.
I KNEW WHO HE WAS BUT I HAD NOT
MET HIM BEFORE.
HE CAME ACROSS AS CANDID,
GENUINE.
HE WAS VERY WELL VERSED ON
UKRAINE AND YEARS AND REALLY
DECADES OF BACKGROUND HERE.
HE KNEW ALL THE PLAYERS,
PRONUNCIATION OF THEIR NAMES
AND THE SPELLINGS.
I THOUGHT HE WAS A GREAT
WITNESS ANSWERED ALL QUESTIONS
FROM THE REPUBLICANS AND
DEMOCRATS.
AND DURING THAT -- BASICALLY
PUT A DAGGER STRAIGHT TO THE
HEART OF SCHIFF'S FAIRYTALE
IMPEACHMENT STORY HERE WITH
REGARDS TO THE QUID PRO QUO AS
YOU JUST PLAYED FROM THAT PIECE
FROM MARK MEADOWS.
HE HEARD WHAT I DID AS WELL.
AND BASICALLY JUST DESTROYED,
BLEW OFF THAT NARRATIVE WITH
EVERY ANSWER HE GAVE.
>> Sandra: HOW SO?
>> WHERE TO START.
I'LL GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE.
FIRST OFF THE ALLEGATION THAT
UKRAINE WOULD BE PROVIDING SOME
TYPE OF ASSISTANCE WITH REGARDS
TO AN INVESTIGATION IN RETURN
FOR SECURITY AID.
THEY HAD NO IDEA THERE WAS A
HOLD ON SECURITY AID AT THE
TIME OF THAT CALL.
AS A MATTER OF FACT THERE WAS A
LOT OF INTERACTION WITH KURT
VOLKER THAT TOOK PLACE IN THE
WEEKS TO FOLLOW THE JULY 25th
PHONE CALL BETWEEN THE TWO
PRESIDENTS.
>> Sandra: WHO IS THEY?
WHEN YOU SAID THEY HAD NO IDEA.
>> UKRAINE.
AMBASSADOR VOL KER WAS IN
PRETTY REGULAR CONTACT WITH THE
UKRAINE GOVERNMENT.
HE HAS RELATIONSHIPS WITH AIDES
TO PRESIDENT ZELENSKY AND HE
MET WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY
RIGHT AFTER THE JULY 25th PHONE
CALL.
IN THE READ-OUTS HE RECEIVED
AFTER THE JULY 25th PHONE CALL
FROM NOT JUST THE UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT BUT THE UKRAINE
GOVERNMENT, UKRAINE HAD NO IDEA
THAT THERE WAS ANY TYPE OF HOLD
ON SECURITY ASSISTANCE.
IT WASN'T BROUGHT UP.
THERE WAS NO CONCERN ABOUT A
QUID PRO QUO IN ANY WAY, SHAPE
OR FORM.
AND THEN --
>> Sandra: THEY KNEW THEY
DIDN'T HAVE THE FUNDS YET,
THOUGH, CORRECT?
>> THEY RAISED NO CONCERN
WHATSOEVER THAT -- THERE WAS NO
BELIEF, THERE WAS NOTHING
EXPRESSED THAT FUNDS WERE NOT
GOING TO BE RECEIVED.
AS A MATTER OF FACT THEY'RE
VERY GRATEFUL BECAUSE NOT ONLY
WAS THERE APPROVALS OVER THE
COURSE OF THIS YEAR.
THEY WERE EXPECTING MONEY, BUT
THERE WAS ALSO GOING TO BE
ADDITIONAL FUNDING IN ORDER TO
PROVIDE LETHAL WEAPONS SYSTEMS
THAT THE PAST ADMINISTRATION
WASN'T WILLING TO PROVIDE.
THE READ-OUTS, THE MEETING WITH
PRESIDENT ZELENSKY, AND THEN
THE FOLLOW-UP -- THE WEEKS THAT
FOLLOWED AND ALL THE
INTERACTION AMBASSADOR VOLKER
HAD WITH AIDES, THEY HAD NO
IDEA THERE WAS A HOLD ON THESE.
>> Sandra: INCLUDING THIS
SEPTEMBER 9th TEXT MESSAGES
THAT I KNOW YOU HAVE HAD A
CHANCE TO LOOK THROUGH AND READ
YOURSELF.
BETWEEN BILL TAYLOR THE TOP
AMERICAN DIPLOMAT IN UKRAINE
AND THE U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE
E.U.
TAYLOR SUGGESTS THAT THE
PRESIDENT WAS HOLDING BACK THE
PACKAGE OF MILITARY AID TO
UKRAINE AS A BARGAINING CLAIM.
AS I SAID ON THE PHONE I THINK
IT'S CRAZY TO WITHHOLD SECURITY
ASSISTANCE FOR HELP WITH A
POLITICAL CAMPAIGN.
THERE WAS A REPLY I BELIEVE
YOU'RE INCORRECT BY P
PRESIDENT'S INTENTION.
HE HAS BEEN CLEAR NO QUID PRO
QUO OF ANY KIND.
WHY WAS TAYLOR MAKING THE
SUGGESTION THAT THERE WAS GOING
TO BE THE WITHHOLDING OF THAT
AID BY THE PRESIDENT UNTIL AN
AGREEMENT WAS MADE ON BEHALF OF
UKRAINE TO INVESTIGATE THE
BIDENS?
>> WELL FIRST OFF YOUR QUESTION
HIGHLIGHTS EXACTLY WHY THE
TRANSCRIPT FROM YESTERDAY
SHOULD BE RELEASED.
NOT JUST DRIP BY DRIP RELEASED
SELECTIVELY CHERRY PICKING
WHICH TEXTS TO PROVIDE TO THE
MEDIA AND AMERICAN PUBLIC.
THE TRANSCRIPT OF YESTERDAY'S
SEVERAL HOUR-LONG INTERVIEW
WOULD BE VERY GREAT CONTEXT
HERE.
BILL TAYLOR WANTED AID TO BE
PROVIDED TO UKRAINE.
HE BELIEVED IN THE MISSION AS
DID VOLKER AND OTHERS IN THE
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.
THEY WANTED THE AID RELEASED.
WHAT YOU SAW FROM AMBASSADOR
SUNDER LUND IMMEDIATELY
SHOOTING DOWN ANY TYPE OF
SPECULATION AS TO WHY THERE WAS
A HOLD.
AMBASSADOR VOLKER TESTIFIED
YESTERDAY THAT EVEN THEY DID
NOT RECEIVE THE REASON AS TO
WHY THERE WAS A HOLD PLACED AT
THAT TIME BUT AS SOON AS THAT
SUGGESTION, THAT QUESTION, THAT
SPECULATION WAS MADE IT WAS
IMMEDIATELY SHOT DOWN.
THERE WAS -- THE PRESIDENT MADE
IT CRYSTAL CLEAR TO OTHER
REPRESENTATIVES WHO WERE PART
OF THIS TEXT EXCHANGE THAT
THERE WAS NO QUID PRO QUO.
THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS SITUATION
IS.
THAT'S WHY THAT WAS SHOT DOWN.
>> Sandra: HE SEEMS TO SUGGEST
IN THE TEXT, HOW DO YOU SEE IT?
I THINK IT'S CRAZY TO WITHHOLD
SECURITY ASSISTANCE FOR HELP
WITH A POLITICAL CAMPAIGN.
SO SOMEHOW BILL TAYLOR WAS LED
TO BELIEVE THERE WAS A PLAN TO
DO THAT.
DOES THAT CONCERN YOU AT ALL?
>> ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS ANOTHER
REASON WHY THAT TRANSCRIPT
SHOULD BE RELEASED.
A GREAT OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW
FOR ADAM SCHIFF TO PROVIDE TO
THE AMERICAN PUBLIC TO FORM
THEIR OWN INDEPENDENT DECISION
AND JUDGMENT IS TO PROVIDE THE
TRANSCRIPT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME OUT
DURING YESTERDAY'S HEARING
DIFFERENT MEETINGS THAT TOOK
PLACE WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES IN THE OVAL
OFFICE MEETINGS THAT TOOK PLACE
WITH AMBASSADOR JOHN BOLTON,
WITH HIS COUNTERPART IN THE
UKRAINE.
AND WHO WAS IN THAT ROOM?
AMBASSADOR VOLKER WAS IN THAT
ROOM TIME AND AGAIN AND YOU HAD
--
>> Sandra: BEFORE WE GO.
WE'RE SHORT ON TIME HERE.
POMPEO.
SHOULD HE COMPLY WITH TODAY'S
SUBPOENA DEADLINE AND TURN OVER
THOSE DOCUMENTS THAT THEY'RE
DEMANDING?
>> IF HE WANTS TO THAT'S FINE.
WHAT I'M HEARING THE RIGHT MOVE
HERE AND SOMETHING THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION IS SERIOUSLY
CONSIDERING DOING IS FORCING
THE HOUSE TO TAKE A VOTE.
PROCESS-WISE YESTERDAY WE
WEREN'T ABLE TO GET STAFF IN.
CHAIRMAN SCHIFF DIDN'T WANT TO
ALLOW MEMBERS TO ASK QUESTION.
HE WAS DISCOURAGING IT.
WE SHOULD HAVE A VOTE IN THE
HOUSE.
IF THEY WANT TO HAVE AN
IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.
I DON'T BELIEVE WE SHOULD HAVE
ONE.
BUT IF THEY WANT ONE THERE
SHOULD BE A VOTE.
MINORITY RIGHTS, SUBPOENAS FROM
BOTH SIDES.
THE PRESIDENT SHOULD BE
REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PRESENT
EVIDENCE.
IF THEY CHOOSE TO COMPLY TODAY
THAT'S FINE BUT REALLY FORCING
THE HAND OF THE HOUSE I THINK
IS THE RIGHT MOVE HERE.