Latest dope on the Democrats impeachment inquiry

You're forgiven for wondering if this post is going to be about Adam Schiffty. But he's not the latest dope. Anyway, there's another meaning to the word. "Dope" can mean "information" or, possibly, "news". Since "Media impeachment frenzy continues, Walt waits for real news" (WWW 3/10/19), I haven't written much about the Democrats' impeachment inquiry -- there's no point pretending that this is a bipartisan exercise -- because, frankly, there's not a lot going on, and what there is is pretty thin gruel.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Intelligence [sic] Chairman Adam Schiff have been handing out subpoenas [subpoenae? Ed.] like cookies. Some White House staffers, past and present, have refused to appear. Those who have obeyed the subpoena have had no direct knowledge of what was said in the now infamous telephone call between Still-President Trump and Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky. Their testimony amounts to "My second cousin has a friend who knows somebody in the White House who hinted off the record that..."

That is set to change today when Alexander Vindman, a US Army lieutenant colonel who served in Iraq and, later, as a diplomat, will testify. According to AP, Lt-Col. Vindman will say that he raised concerns, twice, over the Trump administration's push to have the Ukrainian government investigate Old Joe Biden and his sprog Hunter, and the Democrats in general.

What makes Lt-Col. Vindman's testimony potentially more telling is that he will say that he actually listened to President Trump's July 25th telephone conversation with President Zelensky and reported his concerns to the lead counsel of the National Security Council. AP quotes from a copy of his prepared testimony: "I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a US citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the US government's support of Ukraine."

Apparently Lt-Col. Vindman was "concerned" even before he listened in to the inter-presidential phone call. He took Gordon Sondland, the US Ambassador to the European Union, to task follwing a July 10th meeting -- note the date -- in which Ambassador Sondland stressed the importance of having Ukraine investigate the 2016 election as well as Burisma, a company linked to the Biden family. Again according to AP, Lt-Col. Vindman told Ambassador 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."

So. No pro-Biden or anti-Trump bias there. Nevertheless, the Dumbocrats and the (((controlled media))) are portraying Lt-Col. Vindman as a key witness. However close to the events he may have been, Lt-Col. Vindman is expected to testify that he is not the whistleblower, the still unnamed government official who filed the initial complaint over the telephone conversation that sparked the House impeachment inquiry. Who is the whistleblower? Lt-Col. Vindman will say he doesn't have a clue.

Meanwhile, under pressure to move beyond the first small step towards impeachment (see "How the impeachment process is supposed to work", WWW 24/9/19), Nancy Pelosi announced yesterday that the House will vote on Thursday on a resolution to affirm the impeachment investigation, set rules for public hearings and outline the potential process for writing articles of impeachment. The vote is potentially much more interesting than Lt-Col. Vindman's testimony, because for the first time Congresspersons will have to go on the record as to whether they are in favour of impeaching Still-President Trump. I'll be watching to see which Republicans are "for", and which Democrats are "against". Stay tuned.