The whistleblower is no longer needed….
House investigator’s have a direct link ….
Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman, who is a decorated combat solider, was so concerned about Trump’s comments that he made notes and expressed concerns to the NSC legal lawyer…
His testimony isn’t gonna be positive for Trump and several others who where on the line for the call and say they have a blank recollection of the conversation…
A White House national security official who is a decorated Iraq war veteran plans to tell House impeachment investigators on Tuesday that he heard President Trump appeal to Ukraine’s president to investigate one of his leading political rivals, a request the aide considered so damaging to American interests that he reported it to a superior.
Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman of the Army, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, twice registered internal objections about how Mr. Trump and his inner circle were treating Ukraine, out of what he called a “sense of duty,” he plans to tell the inquiry, according to a draft of his opening statement obtained by The New York Times.
He will be the first White House official to testify who listened in on the July 25 telephone call between Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine that is at the center of the impeachment inquiry, in which Mr. Trump asked Mr. Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
“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,” Colonel Vindman said in his statement. “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.”….
Note…
While Trump’s lawyers have attempted to keep people from doing Q & A’s?
The House continues to have people defy the lawyers and come in from the cold….
image…NYDailyNews.Com
Republican leaders are stepping up to defend Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman against vicious attacks from President Donald Trump’s allies.
Republicans may quibble with the substance of Vindman’s testimony as they try to protect Trump from the fast-moving impeachment inquiry. But congressional GOP leaders say it’s out of bounds to question Vindman’s patriotism and allegiance to the United States, as some conservative pundits did on Monday night….
More…
We’ll see how long the GOP defense of Vindman lasts if Trump starts tweeting out insults.
Former Rep. Sean Duffy has suggested that Vindman’s loyalty lies to Ukraine. A country his family fled when he was 3.
Exactly.
You would think James would tire of trying to “prove” how Republicans are turning on Trump.
I get CG.He desperately wants to believe that his party has not become what it manifestly is , a useful conduit for Trump and his cult.
As Seth Abranson has noted ,Republican regulars live in fear of Trump.If they anger him too much he will start his own party ,thus decimating what would be left of the Republican Party .
All this yakking here about how Republicans are going to “turn on “Trump, “do the right thing” etc. is so much fluff.
The Republican Party is going to back Trump for existential reasons if nothing else ;however ,many of them actual agree with his conduct ,as well as his policies.
Gotta “get them libruls!”
He, he, he….
No ‘greys’ eh Jack?
Oh back to that malarkey?
Just agreeing with Scott’s succinct analysis of the situation.
Can he not see “greys” (whatever that means?) too?
Or is such an “inability “exclusively reserved for me?
Yeah as I me tioned the other day–since Access Hollywood. I don’t trust elected Republicans to make good on their “distancing” from Trump.
If Trump allies genuinely start attacking this Purple Heart winning Army vet’s loyalty , etc, I think you will see some serious fracturing in the Republican Party.
I have said before that there are many people in the Republican Party afraid of going against Trump but hoping for something so incredibly drastic to happen that will allow a wave of them all at once to rise up and revolt.
Jack’s right….
Laura Ingraham has already started throwing against the guy on Fox….
Trump is also going after Vindman….
Romney, Liz Chaney, Thune, McConnell and several other’s have defended Army officer….
Where we disagree is that I think they worry More about the fracturing of the party itself.
Figuring ,maybe not unrealistically,that they can survive Trump and be able to rebuild the party after him ,rather than have him start some type of third party movement that could cripple the party for years to come.
The bone has to break before it can heal. I think any intelligent person in politics realizes it. The “Civil War” within the party is going to have to be fought one way or another. It is possible it could be a relatively quick and bloodless war if people rise en masse. Or it could of course get very ugly.
The more out on a limb they go though, such as would be the case in attackign the Army Lt. Col or painting him as disloyal to his country, the more of a backlash I think happens.
With Access Hollywood, even the people that couldn’t break with Trump or went back on it all *thought* he was likely to lose. They were expecting to just weather the storm and be rid of him. Now, they know better.
They aren’t worried about a Trumpian third party. Such a theoretical thing could break in surprising ways in a general election. They are worried about primaries and primary challenges and where the official machinery of the party will have to go if that group starts gaining even more power internally.
Lots of people think they are worried.
Rich Lowry said in an op ed today that the idea that Republican Senators could vote to remove Trump with the idea that Trump would congratulate President Pence and ride off into the sunset is preposterous.
I agree with that analysis.His ego would never let him do such a thing.Likely he would denounce Pence and the Republican Party ,urge his followers ,of which there are Milliona,your Pooh poohing them notwithstanding, to join him in a “crusade to save America “ from the two parties that brought him down, and wreak havoc with the Republican Party.
To me, that sounds like “wishful thinking.”
He would need to stay Pence’s good gracious for obvious reasons. He will attack anyone that voted to remove him of course.
If he is a reviled figure in America by then, even more than he is now, his scorn can be used to political advantage.
Again, the main thing to accept is that while some people like him because of him, far more numerically that support him don’t even really like him. They just fear liberals more. Whatever utility there is to stop liberals is what they are on board with. To them, right now, Trump is the “lifeboat” of a sinking country. That was expressed to me yesterday by a well-educated person on HHR who personally hates Trump and is torn apart inside by having to stand by him.
When it’s over it’s over and the stewardship of the “battle” moves on to Pence or literally whomever.
No it’s not “wishful thinking” more like a very real possibility.p if Trump were to be removed.
However, there’s really nothing to worry about.
You see the gutless ,cowardly Republican Senators will never vote to remove Donald Trump from the Presidency.
The GOP has already had a split that threatened its relevance, about a century ago with the rise of the Progressive movement. Theodore Roosevelt (Prog.) was second in the popular and electoral vote, but ahead of Wm Howard Taft (R) and behind Woodrow Wilson (D) in 1912. Taft carried only two states (Vermont & Utah) while T.R. carried six (Calif., Wash., S, Dakota, Minnesota, Michigan & Penna.)
There was an abortive attempt to draft T.R. again and a second Progressive Republican convention in 1916, snuffed out on its first day by the refusal to run of Roosevelt (who always kept one foot in the Regular Republican camp while crusading with the Reformers). And Charles Evans Hughes (R-NY), almost won the general election against Wilson, with tight margins in both the Electoral College (254-277) and the national popular vote (46.1% to 49.25%); the national result wasn’t clear until the declaration of California’s 13 Electoral votes which had gone to Wilson by less than 4,000 popular votes (46.65% R to 46.27% D).
The Republicans bounced back with Warren Harding’s landslide in 1920 (often attributed to newly-enfranchised female voters) but faced another, smaller challenge in 1924 from a revived and expanded Progressive Party supporting Robert La Follette (Prog-Wisc.) La Follette — supported by many Progressives but also by the Socialist Party, the labor movement and various miscellaneous radicals, not all of which he accepted as allies — gathered one-sixth of the national vote (16.6% to Coolidge’s 54 % R and John W. Davis’ 28.8%). La Follette pushed Davis into third place in several states (e.g. Calif.) but won only the 13 Electoral Votes of Wisconsin.
By 1928, the Progressives were a spent force nationally, while still being important in various states such as California and Wisconsin. Had they survived until the Crash of 1929 and the start of the Depression, national politics might have played out rather differently in 1930 and 1932.
Again….
Thank You DSD for the backgrounder…
Update’s on Lt. Col. Vindmans testimony today ….
Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, told House impeachment investigators on Tuesday that the White House transcript of a July call between President Trump and Ukraine’s president omitted crucial words and phrases, and that his attempts to include them failed, according to three people familiar with the testimony….
More…
…
“Here we have a U.S. national security official who is advising Ukraine while working inside the White House, apparently against the president’s interest,” Ms. Ingraham said. “Isn’t that kind of an interesting angle on this story?”
Her guest, John Yoo, a former top lawyer in the George W. Bush administration, agreed. “I find that astounding,” Mr. Yoo said. “Some people might call that espionage.”
The accusation by Mr. Yoo was decried by left-leaning pundits and, on Tuesday, by Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, a Republican lawmaker. “It is shameful to question their patriotism, their love of this country,” Ms. Cheney said, calling on critics to stop questioning the colonel’s loyalties.
Still, the notion that Colonel Vindman has some allegiance to a foreign country rapidly spread in right-wing circles, who apparently sensed a useful talking point to undermine testimony that is expected to be deeply damaging to Mr. Trump….
More…
Question?
How far will Trump supporters go to bat for him?
Actually this analysis proves the point.
Third parties never survive in the United States because the two party system is too solidly entrenched.
Both of the Progressive parties were built around allegiance to a man, Roosevelt, then LaFollette ,and ,without them at the helm ,quickly exited the scene.
The odds of a significant third party being on the ballot in 2020 is about 1% at best.
Like it or not the options this time next year will in almost all likelihood be:
Republican nominee: Donald Trump
Democratic nominee: TBD
Libertarian nominee: Justin Amash (at best) or someone less well known
Green nominee: Jill Stein or someone less well known
And an assortment of other nobodies
We can talk about who should have started a third party or what not till the cows come home but that is almost certainly gonna be the menu.
Berkeley law professor John Yoo, when at the Justice Dept, crafted the notorious Torture Memo that justified the kinds of interrogation at Guantânamo and Bagram AFB.
https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2019/10/a-crime-called-libel-experts-outraged-after-torture-advocate-john-yoo-accuses-vindman-of-espionage-on-fox-news/
https://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2005/01/05_johnyoo.shtml