The New York Times has obtained the opening statement of Lieutenant Colonel Alexander S. Vindman, the top White House expert on Ukraine, who will testify to the House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday about his concerns about President Donald Trump’s telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July.
The statement, leaked to the Times — though committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) has likened impeachment to a “grand jury” proceeding, which is typically conducted in secrecy — is described by the Times as the first account of someone who actually listened in on the telephone call, as opposed to hearing about it second- or third-hand.
In his statement, Vindman — a Ukrainian-American and decorated Army officer who was awarded the Purple Heart after being wounded by a roadside bomb in Iraq — outlines his own views on “The Geopolitical Importance of Ukraine.” He adds: “The U.S. government policy community’ s view is that the election of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the promise of reforms to eliminate corruption will lock in Ukraine’ s Western-leaning trajectory.”
Vindman says that he became concerned in the spring of 2019 about “outside influencers promoting a false narrative of Ukraine inconsistent with the consensus views of the interagency.”
That concern for the fate of the “consensus views of the interagency” informed Vindman’s approach to the president’s contacts with Zelensky.
Longtime Serbian leader Vucic’s defeat at the hands of student movement leaves Washington in awkward position
Watch: El-Sayed Staffer Lets His True Feelings About Americans and the Muslim Brotherhood Slip in Devastating Undercover Video
DHS suspends visa-free travel program for Chinese nationals amid birth tourism, security concerns
Germans Furious After Audi CEO Teams with Trump to Announce New Georgia Plant
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to why removing Ilhan Omar from Congress could be harder than Trump expects
Have You Seen Him? Police Search for Murderer Who Escaped Tennessee Prison
Breaking: Comey Charged for Reportedly Leaking National Security Secrets in 2016
Not even sky high gas prices or the Iran war will stop Trump supporters voting MAGA
James Comey charged with leaking national defense information
DOJ seeks to prosecute Comey over alleged national defense disclosure
Trump says Brazil election likely ‘rigged’ as Bolsonaro demands Lula’s victory be annulled
Illegal immigrant accused of beheading Iwo Jima monument granted bond
Man found dead on Disneyland property near entrance to ‘Happiest Place on Earth’
Four things to know about the Israeli election
Omar’s menacing message hidden in seemingly innocent tweet exposed: ‘Crushed the enemy’
He was pleased with Trump’s first congratulatory call to Zelensky in April 2019, but became alarmed in early July when the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, “started to speak about Ukraine delivering specific investigations in order to secure [a] meeting with the President.” Vindman does not identify those investigations.
Later, during a debriefing with American officials, Sondland “emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election , the Bidens, and Burisma,” Vindman recalls. That is when Vindman pushed back, saying Sondland’s statements were “inappropriate” and the National Security Council would not be involved.
On July 25, when the president called Zelensky to congratulate him on his party’s parliamentary victory, Vindman listened in on the call. He says: “I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’ s support of Ukraine.” Notably, the transcript of the call suggests that Trump did not “demand” an investigation of the Bidens.
Vindman goes on to say that he concluded that if Ukraine was seen as a partisan player in U.S. politics, that could undermine “bipartisan support” for better relations with Ukraine. “This would all undermine U.S. national security,” Vindman argues, substituting his views — or those of the “interagency” — for those of the president himself.
Longtime Serbian leader Vucic’s defeat at the hands of student movement leaves Washington in awkward position
Watch: El-Sayed Staffer Lets His True Feelings About Americans and the Muslim Brotherhood Slip in Devastating Undercover Video
DHS suspends visa-free travel program for Chinese nationals amid birth tourism, security concerns
Germans Furious After Audi CEO Teams with Trump to Announce New Georgia Plant
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to why removing Ilhan Omar from Congress could be harder than Trump expects
Have You Seen Him? Police Search for Murderer Who Escaped Tennessee Prison
Breaking: Comey Charged for Reportedly Leaking National Security Secrets in 2016
Not even sky high gas prices or the Iran war will stop Trump supporters voting MAGA
James Comey charged with leaking national defense information
DOJ seeks to prosecute Comey over alleged national defense disclosure
Trump says Brazil election likely ‘rigged’ as Bolsonaro demands Lula’s victory be annulled
Illegal immigrant accused of beheading Iwo Jima monument granted bond
Man found dead on Disneyland property near entrance to ‘Happiest Place on Earth’
Four things to know about the Israeli election
Omar’s menacing message hidden in seemingly innocent tweet exposed: ‘Crushed the enemy’
Vindman says that he reported his concerns to the National Security Council’s lead counsel. He denies being the so-called “whistleblower” or knowing the identity of the “whistleblower,” or wishing to speculate about such. He concludes with another policy view: “The United States and Ukraine are and must remain strategic partners.”
At no point does Vindman accuse the president of breaking the law, but of doing what he thought “inappropriate.”
The public will not see Vindman face questions from the committee, because it is being held behind closed doors and “in defiance of a White House edict not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry,” the Times reports, though it does not explain that the reason for the White House stance is that the House has not yet authorized the inquiry.
Only one copy of the transcript of Vindman’s testimony will be provided to Republican members of the committee, who will only be allowed to review the transcript with a Democratic staffer present to observe them at all times.
Story cited here.
