White House official who reported Ukraine call to testify — live updates

Feb 2006
14,420
2,968
California
Moving On!

  • A decorated Army officer who listened to the president's call with the Ukrainian president plans to testify about the conversation to House lawmakers Tuesday.
  • House Democrats will vote on a resolution laying out procedures as the impeachment inquiry approaches its "public-facing phase."
  • On the July 25 call between Mr. Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Mr. Trump urged Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden.


Look he's waving bye!


1572356448249.png
 
Nov 2005
9,549
4,136
California
I'm a little surprised that some individuals on the right aren't trying to bury this thread in ignorant complaints on "hearsay"...

What I find amusing about this whole thing is that the Repubs don't realize how transparent they are in trying to make up technicalities to throw in the path of the investigation. I haven't read every post on the situation from the right, but not once have I seen any of them try to state that they think Trump is innocent.
Instead, they start whining about hearsay in the thread started to address the fact that the Dems are complying with the actual rules put in place by the Repubs.
And then when a thread on how outdated the b.s. hearsay complaint is, they outright ignore it.

NOT ONCE have I seen any Repub on this board say he was innocent.
And my expectations are that this Army officer will be proclaimed as a liar and smeared as "deep state"... :rolleyes:
 
Dec 2015
18,800
18,204
Arizona
Here's what we've found out. Gordon Sondland lied, according to Colonel Vindman:
"Following this meeting, there was a scheduled debriefing during which Amb. Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma," Vindman's opening statement says. "I stated to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push. Dr. (Fiona) Hill then entered the room and asserted to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate."
The account stands in contrast to Sondland's testimony about the meeting wherein he stated: "if Ambassador Bolton, Dr. Hill, or others harbored any misgivings about the propriety of what we were doing, they never shared those misgivings with me, then or later." Bob Luskin, an attorney for Sondland, declined to comment on the apparent contradiction.
Notably, Vindman's accounting of the meeting matches the testimony of Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in Ukraine, who told investigators Vindman and Hill had detailed the meeting to him.

Now we will see the GOP attempts to destroy the name and reputation of Vindman, a Ukrainian-American United States Army Foreign Area Officer, serving on the National Security Council as director for European affairs. Vindman was listening to the conversation--Trump to Zelensky.
He is a decorated Iraq-war veteran, a recipient of the Purple Heart after being wounded by a roadside bomb. Vindman became part of the U.S. delegation at the inauguration of the Ukraine's newly elected president, Zelensky. He has served in Kyiv, Ukraine, & Moscow.

So wait for it because we know for sure, the GOP will attempt to chew him up and spit him out. In fact, they've already started.
 
May 2018
7,774
5,593
none
Here's what we've found out. Gordon Sondland lied, according to Colonel Vindman:
"Following this meeting, there was a scheduled debriefing during which Amb. Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma," Vindman's opening statement says. "I stated to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push. Dr. (Fiona) Hill then entered the room and asserted to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate."
The account stands in contrast to Sondland's testimony about the meeting wherein he stated: "if Ambassador Bolton, Dr. Hill, or others harbored any misgivings about the propriety of what we were doing, they never shared those misgivings with me, then or later." Bob Luskin, an attorney for Sondland, declined to comment on the apparent contradiction.
Notably, Vindman's accounting of the meeting matches the testimony of Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in Ukraine, who told investigators Vindman and Hill had detailed the meeting to him.

Now we will see the GOP attempts to destroy the name and reputation of Vindman, a Ukrainian-American United States Army Foreign Area Officer, serving on the National Security Council as director for European affairs. Vindman was listening to the conversation--Trump to Zelensky.
He is a decorated Iraq-war veteran, a recipient of the Purple Heart after being wounded by a roadside bomb. Vindman became part of the U.S. delegation at the inauguration of the Ukraine's newly elected president, Zelensky. He has served in Kyiv, Ukraine, & Moscow.

So wait for it because we know for sure, the GOP will attempt to chew him up and spit him out. In fact, they've already started.
Because the GOP have no honor, no standards or morals. They never did.
 
Jul 2019
7,591
4,449
Georgia
Here's what we've found out. Gordon Sondland lied, according to Vindman:
"Following this meeting, there was a scheduled debriefing during which Amb. Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma," Vindman's opening statement says. "I stated to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push. Dr. (Fiona) Hill then entered the room and asserted to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate."
The account stands in contrast to Sondland's testimony about the meeting wherein he stated: "if Ambassador Bolton, Dr. Hill, or others harbored any misgivings about the propriety of what we were doing, they never shared those misgivings with me, then or later." Bob Luskin, an attorney for Sondland, declined to comment on the apparent contradiction.
Notably, Vindman's accounting of the meeting matches the testimony of Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in Ukraine, who told investigators Vindman and Hill had detailed the meeting to him.

Now we will see the GOP attempts to destroy the name and reputation of Vindman, a Ukrainian-American United States Army Foreign Area Officer, serving on the National Security Council as director for European affairs. Vindman was listening to the conversation--Trump to Zelensky.
He is a decorated Iraq-war veteran, a recipient of the Purple Heart after being wounded by a roadside bomb. Vindman became part of the U.S. delegation at the inauguration of the Ukraine's newly elected president, Zelensky. He has served in Kyiv, Ukraine, & Moscow.

So wait for it because we know for sure, the GOP will attempt to chew him up and spit him out.
I wonder if trump is going to throw the "abnormal crew" (Sondland, Giuliani) under the bus

"it was all their idea. I had no idea what they were cooking up, and was just going by their advice for that perfect phone call"
 
Jun 2018
6,606
1,538
South Dakota
The only thing of any real interest in his opening statement was this,
" I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained. "
He's real concern here seems to be that a rif between the US political parties created by an investigation of the Bidens will be created." This raises the question of his motives in calling the call "disturbing" enough to run to the lawyers.
Is that a valid reason? It looks like the only real reason that's popped up so far.
 
Jul 2019
7,591
4,449
Georgia
The only thing of any real interest in his opening statement was this,
" I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained. "
He's real concern here seems to be that a rif between the US political parties created by an investigation of the Bidens will be created." This raises the question of his motives in calling the call "disturbing" enough to run to the lawyers.
Is that a valid reason? It looks like the only real reason that's popped up so far.
you should have posted the rest of the statement, as I've already posted here today.

in fact I bet you probably pulled that quote from some right-wing blog who purposefully quote-mined

anyway. here's the whole paragraph you're referring to

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 6 the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine. I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained. This would all undermine U.S. national security. Following the call, I again reported my concerns to NSC’s lead counsel.
but to understand how important it was to have bipartisan support of Ukraine, you really should have read the beginning of the statement, as to why Ukraine relations are so important to our National Security

The Geopolitical Importance of Ukraine Since 2008, Russia has manifested an overtly aggressive foreign policy, leveraging military power and employing hybrid warfare to achieve its objectives of regional hegemony and global influence. Absent a deterrent to dissuade Russia from such aggression, there is an increased risk of further confrontations with the West. In this situation, a strong and independent Ukraine is critical to U.S. national security interests because Ukraine is a frontline state and a bulwark against Russian aggression.

In spite of being under assault from Russia for more than five years, Ukraine has taken major steps towards integrating with the West. 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, and allow Ukraine to realize its dream of a vibrant democracy and economic prosperity.
I'm going to believe someone who's served on the NSC for years and under several different administrations (who is also a decorated Veteran) over some blogger from the internet, sorry
 
May 2018
7,774
5,593
none
you should have posted the rest of the statement, as I've already posted here today.

in fact I bet you probably pulled that quote from some right-wing blog who purposefully quote-mined

anyway. here's the whole paragraph you're referring to



but to understand how important it was to have bipartisan support of Ukraine, you really should have read the beginning of the statement, as to why Ukraine relations are so important to our National Security



I'm going to believe someone who's served on the NSC for years and under several different administrations (who is also a decorated Veteran) over some blogger from the internet, sorry
Here's what I still believe we're all missing- the religious right admires Russia. They want the US to look more like Russia, especially when it comes to religion. The religious right has never been for individual freedoms, and never will be. I truly think they are trying to bring down our republic in favor of theocracy. Trying to appeal to preserving our American way of life, I believe, is futile with regards to the right wing. It's not something they believe in to begin with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007 and se7en
Feb 2006
14,420
2,968
California
The only thing of any real interest in his opening statement was this,
" I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained. "
He's real concern here seems to be that a rif between the US political parties created by an investigation of the Bidens will be created." This raises the question of his motives in calling the call "disturbing" enough to run to the lawyers.
Is that a valid reason? It looks like the only real reason that's popped up so far.
It's ok, you'll see the light!

1572379126572.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007

RNG

Forum Staff
Apr 2013
40,113
27,936
La La Land North
So the Fox News idiots as well as the new idiot that CNN hired are claiming he's a Ukrainian asset, a spy. Trump is calling him a Never-Trumper. And this was before he even started testifying.

The fear - you can smell it.

A jewish kid that came to the UK from Russia at 3 years of age, must be a spy.

A different idiot on Fox says obviously he's a spy, he can speak Ukrainian. I wouldn't have thought that speaking Ukrainian would work against you when you are hired to be an expert on Ukraine, but then I'm not a GOOPER.