Volker is asked how he felt Biden, Burisma were different
Volker, under questioning from Goldman about the Bidens and Burisma, reiterated that he “did believe that they were separate.”
“Allegations against Biden are self-serving and not credible,” Volker said.
But that, he added, was “separate” from the issue of potential investigations into corruption at Ukrainian companies like Burisma.
Volker testimony includes major changes from private deposition
Kurt Volker, the former U.S. envoy to Ukraine, is amending his testimony from his Oct. 3 private deposition, and now says he didn’t know at that time that military aid to Ukraine had been linked to Ukraine launching investigations that would have been politically advantageous to the president.
“Since I gave my testimony on Oct. 3, a great deal of additional information and perspectives have come to light. I have learned many things that I did not know at the time of the events in question,” Volker said in his opening statement.
“I did not know of any linkage between the hold on security assistance and Ukraine pursuing investigations. No one had ever said that to me — and I never conveyed such a linkage to the Ukrainians," Volker said.
Volker also said that, in hindsight, he now understands the desired investigation into Burisma — the Ukrainian gas company that Hunter Biden joined as a board member in 2014 — was, in fact, intended as an investigation into the Bidens.
“In retrospect, I should have seen that connection differently, and had I done so, I would have raised my own objections,” he added.
These are significant amendments and reinforce the emerging narrative being established by House Democrats that military aid for Ukraine was, in fact, conditioned on the launching of investigations by Ukraine into the Bidens and the 2016 election.
Read the full story.
6 things we learned from Vindman's and Williams' impeachment testimony
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and Jennifer Williams — who both listened in on the July 25 call between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskiy at the center of the House's impeachment inquiry — spent more than four hours testifying before the House Intelligence Committee Tuesday.
During the hearing, both Vindman, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, and Williams, a special adviser on Europe and Russia to Vice President Mike Pence, said that call gave them cause for concern, while Vindman faced repeated personal attacks by Republicans on the committee.
Here are six takeaways from their public appearance.
Morrison: ‘My fears have been realized’
Morrison used his opening statement to share his concerns about the hearings. He said he does not know who the whistleblower is and declined to speculate. Morrison said that he did not feel pressured to resign from his post or fear retaliation, but he was very concerned about the July 25 call between Trump and the Ukrainian president.
"I feared at the time of the call on July 25 how its disclosure would play in Washington's political climate. My fears have been realized,” he said.
He then used his statement to urge lawmakers to not lose sight of the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia after the illegal annexation of Crimea and that these hearings could hurt Ukraine’s efforts to fight the Kremlin.
Nunes slams witness choice before GOP-chosen witness testimony
Rep. Devin Nunes again railed against the impeachment inquiry — calling it “a farce”— and the Democrats leading the process. He complained that the public hearings were not a fact-finding missions but instead designed to “showcase” witnesses chosen by the Democrats.
He failed to mention, however, that the witnesses about to be interviewed were requested by the minority party, according to the committee chairman.
Schiff lays out the timeline in his opening statement
In this afternoon hearing, Schiff used his opening statement to lay out the timeline and facts of the Trump administration's efforts to get Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.
He noted how Volker texted a Ukrainian official ahead of the July 25 call and said that Trump wanted the investigations open before a meeting with Ukraine's president was scheduled at the White House.
Schiff also noted how Morrison was “troubled” by Trump’s call, which prompted him to visit the legal adviser of the National Security Council.
Schiff has consistently used his time in his opening statements to give the viewers and those in the hearing a primer on why these witnesses are key to uncovering Trump’s apparent campaign to pressure Ukraine to investigate a political rival.