So I watched just a little bit of the show today. They had Ms. Williams and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman up on the stand today. I don't recall who asked the question, but each was asked if they were a "never Trumper". Williams answered first, asserting that she didn't know the definition of a never Trumper, so based on not knowing what it was, no she wasn't a never Trumper. Nice dodge to avoid a real answer. Vindman OTOH, completely side stepped the question and answered that he was a never partisan. This is a military man, in uniform, avoiding a simple yes or no question under oath.
You have to think that if either of these two could simply answer "no, I am not a never Trumper" without provably perjuring themselves, they would simply do so. Tells you a lot about the folks who are testifying against Trump IMO.
So Schiff is running the show and can prevent the Bidens from being called to testify, even though they are central to the testimony. After all, this is being painted as asking to investigate a political adversary, not asking to investigate political corruption. Assuming they impeach Trump, and I'm betting they do, it goes to the Senate, for the political equivalent of a Trial to determine guilt, if any. Certainly at that time, at least Hunter Biden is going to be under oath in the hot seat, trying to explain how he "earned" a seat on the board of directors of a Ukraine energy company. I would think they would want to talk to double barrel Joe about how the first investigation got dropped too. I would think the Bidens can't be happy about all of this.
The junior Co!onel, Colonel in training, Colonel wannabe, is upset over Twitter.
Seems like a 12 year old boy maturity level, and not a very bright one. ( I admit this is unfair to 12 year olds, and disrespectful to middle management. I apologize to the mature 12 year olds. )
There's another very weird inconsistency with Vindman. Clearly he was trying to make a big deal of his military background. Very proud to put it on display. At one point in the questioning, the point was made that when Trump asked President Zelensky for a "favor", Vindman said that was a demand. Vindman pointed out that in the military a request for a favor is an order, or a demand. It was pointed out that neither Trump or Zelensky had ever served in the military, and given that fact, could he see asking for a favor among two civilians to be something less than a demand. Vindman said he could not, it was a demand. Very strict about following his military training. So strict that he can't even accept civilians might not be as strict with it. Yet when asked if he was a "never Trumper", under oath in an inquiry to wrong doing by his Commander in Chief, should military protocol be to not give a straight forward yes or no answer, but rather give a joke of a non-answer? Hardly seems like the serious military officer that he was playing himself off as. As pointed out in the article, it's hardly a truthful answer either. It's a shame he's shown himself to not take his part in all of this with the seriousness that it deserves.
Posted on Wednesday, November 20, 2019 - 07:34 pm:
Jim Jordan nails it again. The funny thing is that he has Sonland laughing about the absurdity of his own testimony, and you get to watch as he realizes just how bad of a f#ck up he really has been in his testimony. He has almost certainly flushed his career right down the crapper with this too. For those not paying close attention, this doofus has been the common person that pretty much every other witness in this charade had named as a source for there being a quid-pro-quo. Now it comes out that he point blank, asked Trump what he wanted from the Ukraine, and the answer was "nothing". I guess this will be used as proof positive of quid-pro-quo because Trump got exactly what he said he wanted... NOTHING!
I'm still certain that they will draw up articles of impeachment, facts be damned. Most of the media is spinning this to the point that it's hard to recognize that they are reporting on this inquisition. The one great thing here is that it's all being recorded for historians to view directly and unfiltered. History will not look kindly on today's Democrats. It will have to be seen as an attempted coup, and incredible abuse of the impeachment process.