New ‘Impeachment Inquiry’ Star Witness Admits Protecting the ‘Interagency’

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.

Detained illegal immigrants will face $5K ‘apprehension fee’: Border Patrol chief

DHS fires back after Dem lawmaker claims she was ‘pushed aside and pepper sprayed’ during ICE raid

Texas AG Paxton sues EPIC City developers after probe finds alleged fraud, misleading Muslim-only marketing

Tim Walz slams Trump for calling Minnesota’s Somali community ‘garbage’: ‘Unprecedented’

Trump signs off on nationwide vaccine schedule review as CDC withdraws infant Hep B guidance: ‘Fast track’

Two arrested after dozens of guns, including ‘cop-killer’ model, found in spare tire at southern border: DPS

Pastor Says Barron Trump Is ‘Very Close to Putting His Faith in Christ’ After Lengthy Conversation

88-year-old Army veteran working at grocery store receives over $1.7M in donations after viral video

ICE arrests Azerbaijani national with multiple criminal convictions, including animal cruelty, arson

JetBlue Plane That Abruptly Lost Altitude and Made Emergency Landing Likely Hit by Cosmic Ray: Expert

JD Vance Responds as Media Seeks to Stoke Controversy Over His Wife’s Wedding Ring

Wild scene as protesters trap federal agents in taco shop parking lot; multiple arrests made

Fox News Politics Newsletter: Capitol Hill revolt threatens Trump’s Venezuela playbook

Dem-backed ‘dignity’ bill could strip ICE of detention powers, erase immigration enforcement, critics warn

Disgraceful: Duchess Meghan Accused of Stealing $1,700 Dress from Photoshoot, Using the ‘Archiving’ of Her Royal Clothing as the Excuse

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.