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.
Shapiro responds to illegal immigrant trucker fiasco – says driver was in fed database first
Trump labels 6 Democrats who told troops to refuse unlawful orders ‘traitors’ who should be arrested
Biden’s Legacy: Illegal Driving 18-Wheeler Allegedly Killed National Guardsman, 23, in Another Needless Wreck
Holiday crime fears grow as ‘jugging’ thieves target shoppers carrying cash and gifts: ‘Only a matter of time’
It Was an Invasion – Huge Swaths of Students Missing From Classrooms as ICE Begins Enforcing Law in Charlotte, NC
Republicans facing ‘worst-case scenario’ in redistricting war as midterm elections near
Democrat indicted for alleged theft of disaster relief funds and more top headlines
Trump secures release of American trapped in Saudi Arabia for years over online posts
Texas father dies in accidental shooting on hunting trip, daughter says family is ‘heartbroken’
Federal judge allows Texas AG to challenge Harris County bail reforms: ‘Unleashing criminals’
Appeals court blocks order limiting immigration agents’ use of force in Chicago
Wealthy California town bans pickleball over noise complaints from paddles hitting balls
Senators warn of ‘fragile’ US air system after 43-day shutdown
Dem congresswoman indicted for ‘particularly selfish’ alleged theft of FEMA relief funds for campaign use
Blue city suspect with numerous prior arrests federally charged after allegedly setting woman ablaze on train
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.
Shapiro responds to illegal immigrant trucker fiasco – says driver was in fed database first
Trump labels 6 Democrats who told troops to refuse unlawful orders ‘traitors’ who should be arrested
Biden’s Legacy: Illegal Driving 18-Wheeler Allegedly Killed National Guardsman, 23, in Another Needless Wreck
Holiday crime fears grow as ‘jugging’ thieves target shoppers carrying cash and gifts: ‘Only a matter of time’
It Was an Invasion – Huge Swaths of Students Missing From Classrooms as ICE Begins Enforcing Law in Charlotte, NC
Republicans facing ‘worst-case scenario’ in redistricting war as midterm elections near
Democrat indicted for alleged theft of disaster relief funds and more top headlines
Trump secures release of American trapped in Saudi Arabia for years over online posts
Texas father dies in accidental shooting on hunting trip, daughter says family is ‘heartbroken’
Federal judge allows Texas AG to challenge Harris County bail reforms: ‘Unleashing criminals’
Appeals court blocks order limiting immigration agents’ use of force in Chicago
Wealthy California town bans pickleball over noise complaints from paddles hitting balls
Senators warn of ‘fragile’ US air system after 43-day shutdown
Dem congresswoman indicted for ‘particularly selfish’ alleged theft of FEMA relief funds for campaign use
Blue city suspect with numerous prior arrests federally charged after allegedly setting woman ablaze on train
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.
