end of the fiscal year, we did and an analysis of what other countries were doing. and i can't remember if it was zero or near zero dollars from any european countries for lethal aid. you've heard the president say we give them tanks and other countries give them pillows. that is right. as vocal at the europeans are about supporting ukraine, they are really, really stingy when it coming to lethal aid. they weren't helping ukraine and to this day are not. and the president did not like that. long answer, but i'm still going. those were the driving factors. did he also mention to me that the corruption that related to the dnc server? absolutely. no question. but that is it. and that is why we held up the money. >> so the demand for an investigation into the democrats was part of the reason that he ordered to withhold funding to ukraine? >> the look back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing that he was worried about in corruption with that nation. and that is appropriate.

>> to withhold the funding. >> which ultimately then flowed. by the way, there was a report that we were worried that the money wouldn't -- if we didn't pay out the money, it would be unlawful. that is one of those things that has a little shred of truth in it that makes it look a lot worse than it really is. we were concerned about at obm about an impoundment. and i just know i put half you folks to bed. but the budget control impoundment act of 1974 says if congress appropriates money, you have to spend it. and we knew that that money either had to go out the door by the end of september or we had to have a really good reason not do it. and that was the legality of the issue. >> let's be clear. you described a quid proceed quoe company. it is funding will not flow unless the investigation into the democratic server happened as well. >> we do that all the time with foreign policy. we were holding up money at the same time for, what was it, the northern triangle countries. we were holding up aid to the

northern triangle countries so that they would change their policies on immigration. by the way, and this speaks to an important -- story? this speaks to an important point. i heard this yesterday and i can never remember the gentleman. mckinney? i don't know. but he testified yesterday. and if you believe the news reports, because we've not seen any transcripts of this, the only transcript i've seen is sondland's testimony morning. what did mckinney said? he said that he was upset with the political influence in foreign policy. that was wochbts reasoone of re was upset. i have news for everybody. get over it, there is political influence in foreign policy. elections have consequences. foreign policy will change from the obama administration to the trump administration. and what you are seeing now i believe is a group of mostly career bureaucrats who are saying that i don't like president trump's politics, so i'm going to participate in this

witch hunt that they are undertaking on the hill. elections do have consequences and they should and your foreign policy will change. obama did it in one way, we're doing it in a different way and no problem with that. >> did that come into krlgs when that -- >> sorry, i don't know your name, but he is being very rude. go ahead and ask your question. >> just to clarify and follow up on that question, as to when you are saying politics is going to be involved, the question is not just about a political decisions about how you want to run the government. this is about investigating political opponents. are you saying- >> no, the dnc server -- >> -- that it is okay for the u.s. government to hold up aid and require a foreign government to investigate political opponents of the president? >> you are talking about looking forward to the next election. we're talking about -- >> the dnc is still involved in this next election, is that not correct? >> so wait a second.

so -- hold on. let me -- >> is the dnc a political -- >> there is and on going investigation by our department of justice into the 2016 election. i can't remember the person's name. durham. okay? that is an ongoing investigation. right? so you are saying that the president of the united states, chief law enforcement person cannot ask somebody to cooperate with an ongoing public investigation into wrongdoing? that is just bizarre to me that you would think that you can't do that. >> and so you would say that it is fine to ask about the dnc but not about biden? so biden is now -- biden is running for the democratic nomination for 2020. so you are -- >> that is a hypothetical because that did not happen here. but i would ask you -- >> no, no, on the call, the president did ask about investigating the bidens. are you saying that the money that was heltd held up -- >> the money held up had nothing to do with the bidens.

that was the point i made to you. >> and you are drawing the distinction that -- >> again, i was involved with the process by which the money was held up temporarily. okay? three issues for that. the corruption in the country, whether or not other countries were participating in support of the ukraine, and whether or not they were cooperating in an ongoing investigation with our department of justice. that is completely legitimate. yes, sir. >> regarding the secretary at the state department, the deputies for the european eurasia affairs reportedly testified that you asked him to step down from any issues regarding ukraine. is that true, do you -- >> who said that? >> george kent. >> i'm sorry, i don't know who that is. is that somebody who testified this week? >> yes. >> i don't believe i've ever talked to anybody named george kent in my life nor have i asked anybody to resign their position over this. >> and another thing, there have been reports that you have been

conducting a review of the phone calling with volodymyr zelensky, the ukranian president. and the question is, what are you -- is that true, do you acknowledge that you have been conducting that review or was the call just perfect as the president said? >> again, no one here had any difficulty with the call. there is no difficulty with the call at all. i read it several times. by the way, who was not on the call, someone in my office was on the call, nobody raised any difficulty on the call at all. i understand no one at call offered any difficulty with it. but to your point about what we're doing inside. >> was this an attempt to uncover the whistleblower? >> no. here is what it is. look, if you are having the house do what they are going to do, doesn't it simply make sense for us to try to find out what

happened? this is one of the questions that i don't understand from you folks that we get all the time, which is some of you have criticized us for having a war room. which we don't by the way. you don't have a war room when you haven't done anything wrong. clinton certainly had a war room. i think nick on dxon did, but t actually did something wrong. so you say you are not taking it seriously. yeah, we are. it is part of what we do 37 when you work for the trump administration, you are used to this kind of attention. we know how do this and we are preparing for it. yes, we're having lawyers look at it, yes, o rk, our pr people. if we didn't, we would be committing mal practice. but there is nothing extraordinary that we're doing. we've been dealing with oversight from the democrats since they took office. in fact it is all we've been dealing with because we certainly haven't been doing much legislating since they have been here. yes, ma'am. >> in light of the depositions that we've heard, do you believe that rudy giuliani's role as an

outside adviser to the president is problematic? >> that is the president's call. steve scalise got asked this and he said you may not like the fact -- i understand from reading his opening statement that sondland didn't like giuliani was involved and great. you may not like the fact. that is great. it is not impeachable. the president can use whoever he wants to use. if he wants to fire me today, he can. the president gets to set foreign policy and he gets to choose who. as long as it doesn't violate any laws regarding confidential information or classified material, the president gets to use who he wants to. >> did the president direct you or anyone else to work with rudy giuliani on ukraine? >> yeah, when was it, there was a may meeting and i think thisw. sondland mentioned it and i'm

pretty sure rick perry mentioned it yesterday that in the may meeting in the oval office, that i was in, i think senator johnson was there as well as mr. volker was there, the president asked rick perry to work with mr. giuliani. >> and did you think that was appropriate when you were asked as well? >> i wasn't asked. >> you were not asked. that was my question. were you or anyone else asked. >> and the answer is that the president told rick perry who i think was sort of, you know -- the issue -- one of the reasons we were in there, we were talking about energy and ukraine. we were trying to get ukraine as an energy partner. and so the president said to mr. perry, talk to rudy. >> you haven't asked a question yet. yes. [ inaudible question ] >> shadow foreign policy, that is a team that you are using. what is a shadow foreign policy? the president -- >> operating outside the normal channels.

>> who else is in the room? who is in the room when the president is having this conversation, okay? gordon sondland, ambassador to the eu, kurt volker who was our special designated envoy to the ukraine. i sat next to mike pompeo yesterday at the meeting with the congressional leaders and pd look, i understand i coordinated a coup against you by putting sondland and vom ke sondla sondland and volker in chanlg of ukraine policy and he said you know, they both work for me. there is no shadow policy here. the president is entitled to have whoever he wants to work. >> just to follow on that question, can you describe the role that you played in pressuring ukraine to investigate the bidens? and secondly, can you walk us through the meeting that president trump was dangling over volodymyr zelensky to happen right here at the white house, what were the pre-conditions of that meeting and was investigating --

>> what was your question, what did i do to ukraine? nothing. >> did you do anything to pressure' u ukraine to investig the bidens? >> no. >> and the second question is about the meeting at the white house between the two presidents. you can walk us through the discussions for that meeting? what was on the table for a pre-condition and was the investigation of about a releba brought snup. >> no, i was never in a conversation that had the word barisma in it. or the by denies. that never happened with me in there. but to the larger pointdenies. that never happened with me in there. but to the larger point, the president didn't want to take the meeting. that was mis -- rick perry was pushing for that. >> he said i'll see you here at the white house. >> at the end, yes, but i think

that was a courtesy that he was extending. and he has not been here yet. >> so he was not realistically entertaining a meeting with president zelensky. >> we get asked by foreign leaders all of the time to either come visit their country or are have them come visit here. and we try to be courteous and say yes. some we accommodate and some we do not. i don't remember a serious conversation setting up an actual meeting. there were no dates discussed. i saw that as one of the typical pleasant fridays that we have and it wasn't dangling a meeting or anything like that. >> is the president still going to welcome president erdogan on november 13th? >> i think that depends on the next couple days. it is still on the schedule and i understand that vice president pence's meeting is going much longer than expected today. i hope that they are not having a press conference right now. but i think it is one of those wait and see things. the president has been clear about what he wants to see out of president erdogan. he wants a ceasefire now.

he wants prisoners protected. go down the long list of the things that the president has mentioned to president erdogan. and if we're able to get that, then i think that meeting will go forward. if not, the president will review the possibility. >> you just said that you were involved in the process in which the money being held up temporarily from the country, whether or not the country -- they were assisting with an ongoing investigation. how is that not an establishment of an exchange, of a ququid pro? >> those are the terms that you use. look at what gordon sondland said in his testimony, i think in his opening statement he said something along the lines of they were trying to get the deliverable. and the deliverable was a statement by the ukraine about how they were going to deal with corruption. okay? read his testimony. and what he says, and he's right, that is absolutely

ordinary course of business. this is what you do. when you have someone come to the white house, you either arrange a visit for the president, you have a phone call with the president, a lot of times we use that as the opportunity to get them to make a statement of their policy or to announce something that they are going to do. one of the reasons that then you can sort of announce that on the phone call or at the meeting. this is the ordinary course of foreign policy. yes. >> is it appropriate for any president or this president to pressure a foreign country to investigate a political opponent? >> every time i get that question, that is one of those things about -- it is. but so is when did you stop beating your wife. it assumes that the president did that. we haven't done that. >> i said mr. trump or any president. >> i'm going to talk about what this president did. >> the president's personal attorney rudy giuliani said he sees his work as the president's personal attorney as intertwined with the president's national agenda when it comit kit comes .

do you see that enter defined, is his political interests as a political candidate is intertwined with the national interests. >> >> i don't know how to answer that question except that the -- mr. giuliani is his personal lawyer. >> is it appropriate for a personal attorney to be work being in ukraine on issues that are supposed to be national issues? mr. giuliani says there an attorney/client privilege issue. is that appropriate for his personal attorney to be working -- >> i don't know anything you inappropriate about that. the lady in the back be. yes, ma'am. >> thank you. you say foreign policy is not like in the previous administration. how does the president feel about north korea's break off with the u.s.? >> if the question is responding to breaking off talks, is there news in the last couple days on

that? >> yes rk, october 5th. >> sorry, i'm just not briefed on that. i apologize. >> thank you, mr. mull ve mulva. >> there are public reports that you are objecting within the president's official family to the appointment of ken cuccinelli to head up the department of homeland security. is that so and if so, what is your objection to his possible appointment? >> i have not and i think ken will be good at the job be. yes, ma'am. sorry. did i really ignore you the whole time you're in the front row? sorry. >> so if there was no quid pro quo on the call, if it was routine, if he didn't even want to do it and it is all on the up and up, why did it have to go into this other server? >> i'm glad we got that. a good one to finish on.

i'm not going to answer your question the way you want me to, but i'll answer your question. so give me a second. i'm not going to sit here and talk about how we handle classified information in this building. i got a couple questions about wi my private conversations with the president and i won't talk about that. there is only one reason people care, but they think there a coverup. some hope that there a coverup, oh, my goodness, there must have been something dunderhanded abot how they handled this document. because there must be a coverup. is nix on had a coverup with th tapes, clinton with the relationship with lewinsky. there must be a coverup. if we wanted to cover this up, would we have called the department of justice almost immediately and had them look at the transcript of the tape, which we did? if we wanted to cover this up, would we have released to the public? and by the way, i'm glad now all this concern about how the document has been edited, because i heard adam schiff go

on television yesterday or the day before and say we don't need to hear from the list because now we have the memorandum of communication. everyone wants to believe there is a coverup. you don't stuff to the publgived say here it is. so i won't explain about how we handle documents in the building. i'm telling you that you can stop asking the questions because there is no coverup. and i can prove to you by our actions. look, i know we could do this all night. i'm not taking anymore. nice to see everybody. thanks again. mick mulvaney speaking moments ago, he himself a central player in the impeachment inquiry. ambassador to the european union gordon sondland is testifying under subpoena to house investigators. it is a very, very busy day. and one of the things that we heard that has gotten a lot of

noise, pick mulvaney officially announcing that the next g-7 summit will be held at president trump's national doral resort in miami, florida. he also addressed the unfolding ukraine story. there a lot to get to here. joining us now, kristen welker, she was in that heated room on capitol hill. and also garrett haake being abby livingston, and barrett burger. kristen, i go to you first. for you, what was the most noteworthy thing that you heard during the last 45 minutes of pick mull vein any in that briefing room where he hasn't been a while? >> right, over 200 days, steph. briefing room where he hasn't been a while? >> right, over 200 days, steph. i think the headline is that he all but acknowledged what appears to be some type of, if you want to use the term quid pro quo, for holding up military

aid. he was asked directly why was the military aid held up. you heard him talk about corruption and then he said bluntly that the president wanted ukraine to cooperate in its investigations into corruption, be the dnc specifically. he was pressed on that point over and over again. now, he disputes the characterization of a quid pro quo, but he did acknowledge that look, there was a tit for tat there, that the president wanted ukraine's cooperation in exchange for that military aid. i think that is something that is going to get a lot of attention. there is no doubt about that. because that is the central question at the heart of this impeachment inquiry that is unfolding on capitol hill every day. a couple other points. i pressed mick mulvaney on whether the president directed him specifically to work with rudy giuliani or anyone else. he effectively said look, he did direct rick papery terry to wor rudy giuliani. and when i pressed whether that was appropriate, he said he

didn't find to be inappropriate. you heard him get pressed on that phone call at the end of this briefing. why was it placed in that super secret server and he made the case we have nothing to hide because we released the contents of the call. so it was a fiery debate that began where you mulvaney announcing that they would hold the g-7 in doral, florida, essentially saying that he won't profit off of it so nothing even appropriate, but that undoubtedly will get a lot of scrutiny as well. >> and he said the president isn't going to profit off of that. did he offer any supporting data or information or path or evidence as to how that he would prove that to us? >> so we said will you release the paperwork to prove that and he said likely we won't but he did leave open the possibility that perhaps they would release some paperwork at the conclusion sf the summit. his argument is that people will be essentially staying there, the president won't be reaping any of the financial benefits.

but then you heard eamon javers saying wait a minute, this is essentially a huge commercial for this property. and his push back on that was that the president's name recognition given that he is president can't get any bigger or bolder. but again, you heard him take a lot of questions about kind of the crux of what we've been reporting on, which is that he is accusing the by denies of wrongdoing, of profiting of former vice president biden and how can he make the case given that he is hosting the g-7 summit at his property. that could become complicated moving forward but mick mulvaney argued that it would not be. >> it would be a big advertisement for the president's property assuming that people like staying there. it might not really work out for them. miami "herald" has reported that they previously had a bedbugs issue, the administration pushing back on that. i want to bring in to this conversation former

congresswoman jean harman, now with the wood rorow wilson cent. mick mulvaney was talking about career diplomats who have resigned in the last week or so who thousand want to tenow want ukraine. mick mulvaney saying it is all political, they don't like the president and so this is how they are taking it out. do you see it that way? because others have said no, they don't like that the president's political a genda i trumping foreign policy. how do you see this? >> the old adage was that partisan politics stops at the water's edge and elected officials including me observed that. that has sadly disappeared on both sides. not just on the republican side of the aisle. but the other piece of that is that the foreign service which includes selfless patriots who serve for 30 years usually

overlaps numerous presidents and so many people who come through the wilson center where we really celebrate foreign policy have served both presidents. and both sides. and it is tragic to me to see the hollowing out of the state department, the demonizing of long term and very valued civil servants and frankly position, and you know this, we've talked about this before, the demonizing of the intelligence community where people put their lives on the line in undisclosed locations to try to get the circumstances right to help our policymakers make informed decisions. and we're at a point now sadly where this president and the next president from whatever party is not going to get good advice, is not going to have a process to turn to to get good advice, to think about not just the day of but the day after. >> the president has had access to all sorts of advice and he ran on the i and i alone

president. and while he has many qualified advisers by his side, he is choosing not to use them. he is choosing to use rudy giuliani who has no might havpr we don't even know who is compensating him. so the state department may be gel getti getting hollowed out, but when it wasn't, he wasn't calling on them anyway. >> we seem to have a process free foreign policy and i don't think that serves our country well. i would hope that the good people who are working presently in the trump administration would be called on. you make a very good point, stephanie. and would lend their talent and experience to thinking about the hard problems. guess what? syria is a really hard problem. not just the decision that was made, but the day after and the day after that and the impact that will ricochet across the middle east. and i worry about israel security going forward. >> thank you so much, jane. i know we have limited time with

you. >> thank you. >> pimick mulvaney basically sa yes, he is working with rudy giuliani, take it. the president gets do what he wants. is that how you saw it? >> i mean, this is -- i think the fascinating thing about this is that again the white house press secretary is 24not the on doing these hearings. we have acting chief of staff who is actually possible participant in this story. and so there is so much to glean from this from body language from every word uttered. but i think that it is -- i think that we are still just at the very beginning of this. and to go back to capitol hill where these state department and various government officials are coming into testify, they will come in and the moment they walk through those doors, they will release their opening statement to the press and we all get a look at what their thoughts are. but they would then testify for ten more hours and we have the situation where there is so much more information to be released and transcript and testimony in front of the public that i think that regardless of what was said at this press conference today, there is so much more to go on

this. >> barrett, what a legal perspective, what did you hear? mick mulvaney is trying to change the narrative even away from hunter biden saying it is about the dnc server. >> there was a lot to unpack from this press conference. first thing that just screamed out at me because the potential emoluments clause violations, that we have them just announcing proudly they are not hiding from this, they are just putting it out there. i think that we're getting a constitutional law lesson here. we now know that there are two emoluments clauses, one that deals with getting gifts from a foreign government and one that deals with the president or others in elected office profiting from their public position. >> but they made the official decision to have the event at the dodoral. they clearly cleared it with the white house legal team. why is it allowed? >> i don't know that it is. i mean, right now question hawe lawsuits pending on similar emoluments clause violations and congress possible considering

emoluments clause violations as an article impeachment. it seems like they are doubling down saying no only do we think this is okay, we think that this is a positive for the administration and positive for the country and making this announcement so publicly, it is really surprising given how much heat they have taken on these violations in the past. >> is it surprising or not? kristen welker, you cover this white house all day every day and sundays. is it surprising or have we seen straight out of the gate the president is in a hairy situation and instead of backing away from it and cleaning up, he tears it wide open and doubles down and says sure, i just did this, how you like me now. >> we have seen him double down in this same way over and over again. think about when he stood on the south lawn and called on not only ukraine to investigate the bidens, but also china to investigate the bay denies. a bidens. and you heard him get pressured on that question as well.idens.

bidens. and you heard him get pressured on that question as well. and that is what we're seeing about the decision to hold the g-7 at doral. >> and let's be clear, there was so much for mick mulvaney to go through. whether ukraine, syria, pick your poison. they decide to announce the g-7 is at the doral. and do you know what it does? distracts us. they -- does this not seem to be what the president does over and over? set everyone's hair on fire saying this is outrageous, and we're busy calling the g-7 meeting outrageous and we're not talking about gordon sondland who at this very moment is testifying. >> i think that it is a really important point. no doubt that an announcement like this does serve as amick mh questions. and you can make the case that this is the first briefing that we've had in over 200 days, it

was with the acting chief of staff, not the press secretary. it is an incredible break with tradition here at the white house to not have daily press briefings. and so we crammed in a lot into this one briefing. it is worth noting though at the end of it, he did get a number of tough questions about the news of day, about key topics, but we sure do have more questions. so would welcome another briefing tomorrow and every day, you know, until election day. let's put it that way. >> we certainly appreciate mick mulvaney's time and being so candid, but guess what, we are not going to get distracted. so let's go to you, garrett haake and more about gordon sondland, ambassador to eu. mick mulvaney pressing again why it made since sonde land would be in the conversation regarding ukraine. we need remind our audience, ukraine is not part of the eu. tell us what is going on with sondland right now.

>> reporter: i'd like to get to that, but a quit button on mulvaney as it relates to impeachment. we shouldn't lose sight of this. the reason we are talking about impeachment in the first place is because of that phone call in which democrats say you have the president of the united states making a quid pro quo for military aid to ukraine versus on the other side of the trade deal information about the bidens. what mick mulvaney just said, we are absolutely holding up military aid for the ukranians, but not for that issue, for another set of issues. he essentially admitted that they are trading the military aid for something from ukraine just not that something. you already have the other piece of that puzzle, which is the president of the united states saying publicly that he wants information on the bidens. and mulvaney said not only did we do this in this case, but this is how we operate. he walks extraordinarily close to the edge of admitting straight out exactly what democrats are trying to investigate.

i think pick mullpick -- mick m just basically printed himself a ticket to come down here and testify. sondland has been in this room a couple hours thousand. and his opening statement tries to pull sonde land out of the fire saying he was not as involved as folks would like to believe. but he does point the finger back at president trump saying that president trump's lawyer rudy giuliani was not freelancing here, that in fact it was the president of the united states who directed he gordon sondland, rick perry and others that if they wanted to work on ukraine issues, do it through rudy giuliani. in the big picture part of this, it just puts all the focus back on the president of the united states and the folks he had working for him doing what amounts to off the books diplomacy. and in this case rudy giuliani. it lines up with what we've heard from other witnesses that the state department, the ambassadors, folks supposed to be doing this kind of foreign

policy work were essentially told to sit on their hands or to coordinate with rudy giuliani and thereby with the president. and you mulvaney say that is fine, everything is above board. and that is something that he will be questioned about too. should he take up that opportunity to come testify. >> garrett, stay right there. we have breaking news in turkey right now, president trump tw t tweeting about it saying great news out of turkey, news conference shortly with vp and secretary pompeo. thank you erdogan. millions of lives will be saved. we don't know what will be said in this press conference, but we do know that vice president mike pence and secretary of state mike pompeo are speaking after talks took place with turkey's president erdogan, the u.s. delegation is pressing for turkey to call a ceasefire with syria. i want to bring kristen welker back. i know i'm giving you zero time to report, but what do you know?

>> reporter: well, i would stress the fact that that was vice president mike pence's big ask, for a ceasefire. we've heard that from president trump over the past several days. mike pompeo. and that is clearly what their goal was. so i wouldn't be surprised if that is part of what we're about to hear and of course they will get a number of questions because they are likely going to hold a press availability as they come to the podiums there. but again, this was the big ask. president trump announcing the withdraw of troops from the border of syria and of course we have seen turkey move in and of course the incursion that has been caused as a result of that, the lives that have been lost, the reports of isis fighters that have been released from detention facilities. pld getting a rpresident trump getting a bipartisan rue beak fr

rebuke from capitol hill yesterday saying this is not the right way to pull out of syria. so the trump administration is pressuring turkey with the threat of sanctions. so again, this would be very significant if there was in fact an announcement of a ceasefire. but i would caveat all of this with you can announce a ceasefire but once you are in a volatile region, it can be difficult to actually enforce it. so we'll have to see what the vice president and secretary of state have to say. >> what changed erdogan's mind? when we first heard reports that they were headed over, erdogan said nope, i don't plan to sit down with them. why did that change? kristen. >> oh, sorry, steph. yeah, i think that again light going back to the sanctions, i think that they were turning up the heat on turkey to essentially try to have them stop the blood shed, the killing that we've all been witnessing. those images that we've been witnessing over the past several days. and i think that that was part of the pressure that forced

erdogan to actually sit down. remember, he is expected to visit the white house. mick mulvaney was asked about that, he was asked if that is still on the table and at this point in time, that plan does not seem to have been changed. so that is part of the pressure pib point. but it would be a significant announcement if there was in fact a ceasefire. >> abby, i know that we all have very limited information thus far. but from what the president is telling us, hundreds of lives will be saved. clearly he is hinting that they have agreed on a ceasefire. does that seem like that is what is -- actually, mike pence and mike pompeo hitting the sagtage. let's take you there. >> one week ago turkish forces crossed in to syria. earlier this week, president trump took decisive action to call on turkish forces to stand down, end the violence, to agree to negotiations.

and today, i'm proud to report thanks to the strong leadership of president donald trump and the strong relationship between president erdogan and turkey and the united states of america, that today the united states and turkey have agreed to a ceasefire in syria. turkish side will pause operation peace spring inned to allow for the withdrawal of ypg forces from the safe zone for 120 hours. all military operations under operation peace spring will be paused. and operation peace spring will be halted entirely on completion of the withdrawal. our administration has already been in contact with syrian

defense forces and we have already begun to facilitate their safe withdrawal from the nearly 20 mile wide safe zone area. south of the turkish bore with der in se der in syria. let me say this, also includes an agreement by turkey is to engage in no military action against the community of kobani, and in addition, the united states and turkey have both mutually committed to a peaceful resolution and future for the safe zone working on an international basis to ensure that peace and security defines this border region of syria. in addition to the settlement today with the ceasefire, turkey and the united states mutually committed to the defeat isis

activities in northeast syria. this will also include an agreement renewed today to coordinate efforts on detention facilities and internally displaced persons in formerly isis-controlled areas. also turkey and the united states agree on the priority of respecting vulnerable human life, human rights and particular particularly -- i spoke to president trump just a few moments ago. and i know the president is very grateful. for president erdogan's willingness to step forward and enact the ceasefire and to give an opportunity for a peaceful solution of this conflict that commenced one week ago.

for my part, i'm grateful for the president's leadership. i'm grateful for the more than five hours of negotiations with president erdogan and his team that arrived at a solution that we believe will save lives. and let me the say i'm very grateful for this team. to be able to have alongside the secretary of state mike pompeo. our national security adviser, robert o'brien. ambassador jim jeffries and ambassador david satterfield. it was a great privilege. and each of the members of this team contributed equally to achieving this outcome. which is a great contribution to security in this region and it is a great contribution to the strong and enduring relationship between the united states of america and turkey. lastly, i want to express my

appreciation to millions of americans who i know were carrying this moment in prayer. we heard from people all over the country whose hearts were heavy with the lot of life in this conflict over the last week, longed to see it brought to an end. and i believe their prayers, the strong leadership that president trump provided to this moment, and the cooperation with president erdogan and turkey has made this possible. and so again, let me say a week after turkish forces crossed in to syria, turkey and the united states of america have agreed to a ceasefire in syria. it will be a pause in military operations for 120 hours while the united states facilitates the withdrawal of ypg from the

affected areas in the safe zone and once that is completed, turkey has agreed to a permanent ceasefire and the united states of america will work with turkey, will work with nations around the world, to ensure that peace and stability is the order of the day in this safe zone on the border between syria and turkey. with that, let me recognize secretary of state mike pompeo and thank you, mr. secretary, for your great work. >> thanks. i think the vice president said it. and while i just wanted to add this thought, there obviously remains a great deal of work do in the region. there is a lot of challenges that remain. but this effort tonight sets the conditions for the successful resolution of this particular piece which created a enormous risk of instability. and president erdogan's decision tonight to work alongside president trump to achieve this end will be one that i think

will benefit turkey a great deal. thanks. and i know you want to take some questions. >> thank you. go right ahead. >> thank you very much. what do you -- how do you overcome -- how will you overcome the damage that has been caused over the past week? there has been a lot of animosity between u.s. and turkey, a lot of things have been said and a lot of threats of economic sanctions have been made. how will you repair the relationship going forward? thank you. >> well, first as you will see from the agreement, part of our understanding is that with the implementation of the ceasefire, the united states will not impose any further sanctions on turkey. and once a permanent ceasefire is in effect, the president has agreed to withdraw the economic

sanctions that were imposed this last monday. make no mistake about it, president trump was very clear with our ally, turkey, about american opposition to turkish military forces entering syria. the president made that clear in his discussions and in his correspondence with president erdogan. and i believe that the candor and frankness that president trump applied to this and the strength of his relationship with president erdogan both contributed to the ability for this agreement to come about. and now we will work together to implement this agreement. as i said, our team is already working with ypg personnel in the safe zone for an orderly

withdrawal outside the 20 mile mark and we'll go forward together to bring peace and security to this region. i'm very confident of that. okay. gomga sinaip please. >> thank you. from t.i. ti world. there are reports from some international organizations on how ypg is treating ethnic and religious minorities in northern syria. and christian leaders in turkey are making calls to the country to ensure peace and security in the region. and i'm wondering your thoughts on this. >> let me let the secretary also address that, but you can tell you that president erdogan and i spoke at great length about the importance of protecting religious minorities in the region. president erdogan also shared with me the perspective of many

leaders in religious communities here in turkey who had grave concerns about violence and persecution taking place along the border. and so part of our agreement is to continue to work very closely to ensure that religious minorities can thrive and that religious pluralism is one of the characteristics of this safe zone for some time to come. mr. secretary. >> and we've certainly heard from christian leaders aurn the world who expressed much of the same concern that just described. we think that this reduction in violence, this ceasefire, reduces the risk of that, so we think that this greatly contributes to protecting religious minorities throughout syria and throughout the broader middle east as well. this all obviously happens in the context of lots of religious challenges, lots of challenges

of religious persecution in iraq and other places. but we think that is an important contribution in that regard. and we talked about at some length that to the extent there are abuses that are identified, we'll ask each leader certainly president erdogan and his team and others to investigate any allegations of abuse that have taken place. >> and let me maybe add an addendum to that. one of the things that i know that the president and the american people are most proud of is that investment of hundreds of millions of dollars to help rebuild a christian and other religious minorities in the after fact oig teter of ts. and we'll continue to flow those contributions. but is this a specific undertaking by turkey and the united states to ensure to protect religious minorities in

the affected region. sean tandem. >> thank you, mr. vice president. you mentioned that the ypg fighters. can you explain that more? you said there is an agreement. where will they withdraw to, what do you see of their future and while there are concerns about their links to the ppk, many in washington say that they led part of the flight fight against isis. what do you see for the future of northern syria and do you see any future for the syrian kurds politically there? >> well, our commitment with turkey is that we will work with ypg members and we also know as syria defense forces to facilitate an orderly withdraw over the next 120 hours. and let me say that is literally

already begun. and where they will be withdrawing from is the demarcation line roughly 20 miles south of the border. turkey's willingness to pause and to embrace a ceasefire of military operations to enable us to see to that orderly withdraw of ypg will we believe make it possible for that to owe did your. and i know that it is already under way as we speak. but look, turkey is at a great concern about their border. and while the united states of america did not approve of their military crossing into syria, we have always endorsed a safe zone. and it was a matter of

discussion and negotiations and we believe that the kurdish population in syria with which we have a strong relationship will continue toendure. the united states will always be grateful for our partnership with sdf in defeating isis. but we recognize the importance and the value of a safe zone to create a buffer between syria proper and the kurdish population and the turkish border and we're going to be working very closely. so we think the agreement today first ends the violence, which is what president trump sent us here to do. i said it again and again to president erdogan, president trump sent us here to end the violence. and to achieve an immediate cease-fire. and thanks to the agreement that we negotiated today and the

strong stand that president trump took in the proceeding days, we've achieved that. we've also achieved an opportunity by working with ypg to move out of the area, to create more peace and security and stability in that buffer zone. and we're going to be working very earnestly to accomplish that. we believe that can be accomplished during the 120-hour period. and after which there'll be a permanent cease-fire and then we'll continue to engage. again, not militarily. the president made it clear that we're not going to have military personnel on the ground, but the united states will continue to engage diplomatically, politically, and of course, in humanitarian aid and support to affect all of the people affected in this region. >> last question. >> thank you, mr. vice president. you mentioned that -- excuse me. you mentioned that the united states -- you mentioned the united states opposed turkey's

incursion into northern syria. that erdogan had always wanted a sort of safe zone here. what concessions did you actually get out of president erdogan, number one. number two, have you gotten specific assurances from the ypg that they would comply with the terms of this agreement, because this is something that they have said that they would not do. and finally, with the kurds moving south and now with the u.s. sanctions in terms of them moving south, how would you address critics who would call this essentially a second abandonment of the kurds? >> well, i think you'll be able to see from the agreement itself what concessions were made. president trump, in his telephone call with president erdogan earlier this week, and in the directive that he gave us to deliver, was very clear that he wanted a cease-fire. he wanted to stop the violence. turkey's engaged in an active

military operation. i can tell you that as our discussions began over the course of the five-hour period of time, we reached a place of agreement about how a cease-fire could benefit turkey, achieve president trump's objectives, and also contribute to a peaceful resolution of the safe zone. and i believe that we've accomplished that. with regard to the ypg, syrian defense forces, we have been in contact today and we have received repeated assurances from them that they'll be moving out. that they greatly welcome the opportunity for a cease-fire, to make a safe and orderly withdrawal from those areas in the safe zone, where they still have a presence. and we're very confident that that's already taking place and

we're going to be using all the leverage that we have, of having fought alongside syrian defense forces in the battle against isis to facilitate their safe withdrawal. but we think -- we think this is an outcome that will greatly serve the interests of of the kurdish population in syria, greatly serve the interest of turkey, and it will create the kind of long-term buffer zone that will ensure peace and stability in the region. >> mr. vice president, just want to follow up on that question. what specific concessions did turkey receive? specifically, i want to ask you if they brought the issue of the bank, hawk bank, rather. >> not in the context of these negotiations. i think when we had concluded the negotiations, the topic was

raised. and we informed them that that was a matter for the southern district of new york and the justice department. but let me say the concessions that the united states made have to do with the fact that the president had made it clear that if there had not been a round oe sanctions against turkey. and you'll see in the agreement that on the basis of the pause of 120 hours, a cease-fire over the next five days, that we will not be implementing additional sanctions during that period of time. once we have a permanent cease-fire, following orderly withdrawal of all ypg forces, the united states also agreed to withdrawal the sanctions that

were imposed on several cabinet officials and several agencies earlier this week. >> so -- >> just a follow up? >> to be clear, though, to nail this down, it was simply the sanctions that would be removed. nothing else was offered or given to the turks. >> yes, right. >> thank you, guys. >> go ahead. go ahead. >> thank you, mr. vice president. while you are here negotiating with the turks for several hours, both of you -- can i finish real quick? >> -- using the sanctions as a blackmail to your nato ally for the sake of the pkk organization. this is a question -- >> the united states of america did not support turkey's

military action in syria. president trump made that very clear to his friend, president erdogan. and the united states imposed sanctions earlier this week and the president made it clear yesterday and we made it clear again today that there would be additional sanctions coming to bring an end to the violence, to the loss of innocent lives in this border conflict. that being said, let me say, i really believe today, today's cea cease-fire is a credit to president trump and to president erdogan. it's a credit to the strong relationship between the united states and turkey. it's also a credit to the strong relationship between our two leaders. where there are differences between friends, it's important that friends let their feelings be known. president trump did that in this

case. but it facilitated us being able to reach an agreement that is now resulting in a cease-fire. and we believe will set the stage for creating a peaceful and stable safe zone and the united states is committed to achieving that for all the people of this region. all right. >> mr. vice president. mr. vice president! can i finish my question that i started, please? >> that was a lot. joining us now, nbc's richard engel. he is live in northern syria. nbc's peter alexander at the white house. and in a moment, nbc's senior international correspondent, keir simmons, who is in turkey. and we are back with abby livingston of the texas tribune. peter alexander, to you first. i know you're absorbing this information, just as we are. a five-day cease-fire. do we know what this means for the u.s. troops? and is anyone saying anything yet about the 218 civilian lives already lost. for what? >> reporter: yeah, stephanie, you make a good point right there. and as we heard from the vice

president just moments ago, he said, a lot of this will be made clear when you see the agreement. but i think critics will view this cease-fire right now, this agreement that mike pence said was based on the strong relationship between president trump and president erdogan of turkey. and say, in effect, the u.s., the president, with his abrupt withdrawal of u.s. troops from that region, set a fire, now is returning there to try to put the fire out. but the bottom line is that vacuum has been filled with death and with the recent infiltration, in effect, of russian troops there. this is a complicated, challenging situation that a cease-fire doesn't simply erase. will the kurds abide by it? that's one question that needs to be resolved. what happens to the limited number of american troops? the president said he wanted to bring those troops home. 1,000 u.s. troops in that region. what specifically will happen to them? what role will they play in ensuring this withdrawal? it is to be a cease-fire to last 120 hours. in effect, to move that mainly

kurdish force 20 miles from the border with turkey. to help try to protect that safe zone there. but the bottom line is, after that happens, will there be a permanent cease-fire? mike pence says that turkey agreed to that. what will the u.s.' role there be going forward? still a lot of questions remain unanswered. and frankly, the situation is one, in the eyes of many of the president's republican allies, including lindsey graham, that did not need to exist in the first place. >> do we understand -- i realize, again, it's only been a minute or two, but have lawmakers at all, they're reacting as we are. have we seen any tweet responses thus far? because many people already, it seems, are saying, what was the point of all of this? >> reporter: yeah, well, among those who are saying, what was the point of all of this, as i just noted, is lindsey graham ourself. i'm told by our colleagues on the hill right now, that he has been speak to reporters, saying that the president called him directly to tell him that there was a new cease-fire that had been implemented