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.
MS NOW Falsely Reports Kash Patel Is in Russia – Gets Brutally Fact-Checked Directly by the FBI
‘Serial Killer’ Concerns Grip Michigan’s Capital as Similarities Are Noted in 5 Recent Deaths
Trump torches Democrats at Arizona rally, warns they will ‘destroy our country’ ahead of midterms
Federal agents seize phone of Rep. Ilhan Omar in raid tied to immigration fraud probe
High School Football Coach Fired, Allegedly for Running Up Score Against Lesser Opponent
House Democrat Reveals Plan to Knock Maxine Waters Off Her Leadership Pedestal, Sparking Internal Turmoil
Fox News Poll: Cost of living concerns weigh on GOP in midterms
Expert calls California ‘Wild West’ for surrogacy after couple charged with abusing surrogate-born children
Karen Bass and Nithya Raman vie for Spencer Pratt’s voters in final Los Angeles mayoral debate
DOJ unveils nationwide tax fraud crackdown involving 76 defendants, nearly $500M in alleged losses
Breaking: The DOJ Has Seized Ilhan Omar’s Phone
Dem AG targets Trump on voting while his state sends rights letters to dead people
Metallica Frontman Triggers Leftists with Subtle Shot at Zach Bryan, Macklemore, and Jelly Roll
Mamdani accuses Blakeman of ‘bigotry and racism’ in breakout debate that mayor didn’t watch
Lindsay Clancy mistrial holdout says he thought she was ‘methodical’ in the ‘execution’ of her children
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.
MS NOW Falsely Reports Kash Patel Is in Russia – Gets Brutally Fact-Checked Directly by the FBI
‘Serial Killer’ Concerns Grip Michigan’s Capital as Similarities Are Noted in 5 Recent Deaths
Trump torches Democrats at Arizona rally, warns they will ‘destroy our country’ ahead of midterms
Federal agents seize phone of Rep. Ilhan Omar in raid tied to immigration fraud probe
High School Football Coach Fired, Allegedly for Running Up Score Against Lesser Opponent
House Democrat Reveals Plan to Knock Maxine Waters Off Her Leadership Pedestal, Sparking Internal Turmoil
Fox News Poll: Cost of living concerns weigh on GOP in midterms
Expert calls California ‘Wild West’ for surrogacy after couple charged with abusing surrogate-born children
Karen Bass and Nithya Raman vie for Spencer Pratt’s voters in final Los Angeles mayoral debate
DOJ unveils nationwide tax fraud crackdown involving 76 defendants, nearly $500M in alleged losses
Breaking: The DOJ Has Seized Ilhan Omar’s Phone
Dem AG targets Trump on voting while his state sends rights letters to dead people
Metallica Frontman Triggers Leftists with Subtle Shot at Zach Bryan, Macklemore, and Jelly Roll
Mamdani accuses Blakeman of ‘bigotry and racism’ in breakout debate that mayor didn’t watch
Lindsay Clancy mistrial holdout says he thought she was ‘methodical’ in the ‘execution’ of her children
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.
