The original whistleblower, who is said to be in hiding, might have spoken to Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman before he filed his complaint. Vindman is also the man that National Security Council aide Tim Morrison said had questionable judgment. He confirmed that several others, including Fiona Hill, agreed with him about Vindman’s judgment. They left him out when they could.
The Washington Post suggests Ukraine whistleblower [probably Eric Ciaramella] who launched the Trump-Ukraine impeachment inquiry [trial], might have spoken with Vindman. He was still attending White House meetings recently.
Everyone was so ALARMED by Trump’s call, the Post assures us, and that’s why all this went down.
On Saturday, WaPo published details about the steps a CIA analyst took to blow the whistle on the president.
“The analyst had served on the National Security Council during the Trump administration and had been in the presence of the president. After returning to the CIA, his job required him to continue to participate in National Security Council meetings,” the publication reported, indicating that the whistleblower was still attending meetings at the White House recently.
WaPo claimed the whistleblower never told any of his White House contacts about his plans to file a complaint, which he worked on “after hours” in his cubicle at the CIA headquarters for two weeks before submitting it on Aug. 12.
Before filing the complaint, the anonymous person spoke with a White House official who was “shaken” over the call he described as “frightening,” “crazy,” and “completely lacking in substance related to national security.”
These people are nuts.
WaPo says it’s not confirmed but the official could have been Vindman, who still works with the whistleblower on U.S.-Ukraine policy. “The analyst does not identify the official in his July 26 memo, which was obtained by congressional investigators in the impeachment inquiry. But Vindman, in his testimony, disclosed that he had spoken to officials outside the White House within days of the Trump-Zelensky call,” according to the report.
This fiasco, which hasn’t moved the polls from what we can tell, was originally about a possible quid pro quo crime. There are holes in that so Democrats moved on to extortion. This past week, Democrats said it’s a case of bribery.
It’s unclear what crime the President allegedly committed.
THE CRIME & THE EXECUTIONER
Rep. Schiff is the “impartial” judge, jury, and executioner in this mess. Schiff said he’s reserving judgment on whether he will recommend impeachment, but in this next clip, he brags about his ‘resistance’ credentials and then moves on to state the following:
