It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Vindman called the July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy "improper" and testified that he had a "duty" to report the call to White House counsel John Eisenberg.
"Without hesitation, I knew I had to report my concerns to the White House counsel. As I said in my statement, it was improper for the president to demand an investigation into a political opponent, especially from a foreign power where there's at best dubious belief that this would be a completely impartial investigation," Vindman said.
originally posted by: Liquesence
Vindman also listened:
Vindman called the July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy "improper" and testified that he had a "duty" to report the call to White House counsel John Eisenberg.
"Without hesitation, I knew I had to report my concerns to the White House counsel. As I said in my statement, it was improper for the president to demand an investigation into a political opponent, especially from a foreign power where there's at best dubious belief that this would be a completely impartial investigation," Vindman said.
link[/q uote]Too had, he superior didn't see any concerns and neither did Williams ot Volker.
All in all, at the end of the say, No QPQ, Obstruction or Bribery.
It is amusing to see you grasping straws 😂🤭
originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: Liquesence
Regardless of what he said, was aid held for a statement?
Uh Huh, so much so, that he went outside his chain of command because it was a "busy week", auto red flag for any service member, but more importantly, a huge red flag, especially for a verified and known partisan with a questionable history.
originally posted by: Liquesence
originally posted by: Arnie123
That's too bad, Morrison also said there was nothing concerning with regards to the July 25th call, the epicenter of the whole ordeal.
originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: Grambler
the latter two witnesses who both had far more access to trump and zelenskys team said over and over they never saw any evidence aid was conditioned on investigations, or any evidence of a bribe or a quid pro quo.
Incorrect.
“What did Ambassador Sondland tell you that he told Mr. Yermak?” Democratic counsel Daniel Goldman asked Morrison. Morrison replied, “That the Ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations as a condition of having the aid lifted.”
vox
But he felt the need to express concerns to others about it and that it should not be made public.
originally posted by: Liquesence
originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: Liquesence
Regardless of what he said, was aid held for a statement?
Yes, aid was held. That's the point.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: burdman30ott6
Was watching Tucker.
I was unaware that Vindman was offered (3 times) a position as Ukrainian Defense Minister.
The question was aid held for a statement.
Zelensky never gave that statement,
he received aid.
originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: Grambler
The question was aid held for a statement.
Correct. Aid held for ____.
Zelensky never gave that statement,
No, he didn't. And it's irrelevant to the request.
he received aid.
They did. The receipt is irrelevant to the request.