Vindman's testimony is that he thought the Ukraine call was "inappropriate" because it might put U.S. bipartisan support of Ukraine at risk. In other words, it was a policy disagreement about risks and priorities. Normal business. #NextHoaxPlease
-
-
Even if an investigation is warranted, the channels attempted were improper and were used as a cut-out for unethical behavior.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
@ScottAdamsSays, Glad to hear you reference "The Epoch Times" on you podcast. I missed it live, so I want to point out to you, that they're a good source for all geopolitical news. The MSM/legacy "Uni-media" routinely leave huge stories completely out of their coverage.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Imagine General Washington approaching Saratoga thinking “Shall we take the fort? No...we can’t. Driving out the British might serve me politically, in 1790 election.”
-
I think a more apt analogy would be to imagine General Washington offering the British General holding Saratoga reprieve if he would release a public statement politically harming John Adams
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There is no public interest in extorting an ally to dig up dirt on a political opponent. The interest lies with one person only. Donald Trump.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Those “investigations” were not part of our national security policy for Ukraine. In fact they were counter to it. It makes no sense to ask a corrupt foreign judiciary to investigate a US citizen. They are highly motivated to trump up charges because they are corrupt!
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.