November 19, 2019: Even a Pig Could Probably Tell Trump Was Lying

 

11/19/19: Most Americans struggle to keep up with all the impeachment doings. More than a dozen witnesses have testified behind closed doors, some remaining on the stand for as much as ten hours. Their combined depositions, for just the first ten, already released, total 3,500 pages. Even if you do try to keep up and watch, you have to endure Rep. Jim Jordan’s constant yelling. Seven in ten Americans say they are trying to keep up. The other three are napping, knitting Christmas sweaters, or kicking themselves for believing the Cincinnati Bengals might win a game this season. 

If you are trying to follow the hearings, we are here to help. But, of course, if you are already a reader of this blog, you are clearly among the intellectual elite and may not need assistance.

 

____________________ 

“I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense.” 

President Volodymyr Zelensky

____________________

 

 

For starters, today, let’s go back to the White House transcript of the July 25 phone call. This is the call that triggered the whole impeachment mess. Even Rep. Jordan, the loudest and most obnoxious of all the president’s defenders, readily admits that Donald J. Trump, speaking to President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, asked the Ukrainian leader “to do us a favor.” 

If you’re keeping up on your own, you already know this. Bear with me. Zelensky has just said, “I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.” 

That comment comes at the very bottom of page two in the July 25 call memorandum (if you feel an urge to check). Javelins are high-tech anti-tank missiles and the Russians have been careful about attacking Ukrainian forces since the first shipment arrived. In March 2018, the Trump administration okayed a $47 million sale of 210 of the shoulder-fired missiles, with launchers. 

Excellent weapon. The Javelin is a “fire and forget” armament, allowing a soldier to fire it and take cover immediately. With a range of up to 4,000 meters (well over two miles), it has an infrared guidance system. The missile is designed to strike tanks from above, where armor is thinnest. Deadly to Russian armored vehicles and crews. Okay: Good job (for once), President Trump! 

Way to support an ally (if they pay), even if you did screw the Kurds.

Javelin being fired.

 

Trump responds immediately on that call (and according to Jordan and his other GOP defenders there’s nothing wrong with his response): “I would like you to do us a favor though.” Zelensky wants arms. Trump wants Zelensky to launch an investigation. At the top of page four of the memorandum, he tells the Ukrainian leader, “Rudy [Giuliani] very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great.” 

In other words, the man who controls vital U.S. military aid, is asking the newly-elected President of Ukraine to talk to his personal lawyer. Rudy will let him know what he needs to do.

 

* 

“It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the political benefits.” 

FOR CONTEXT, suppose this were Russia in 2016, and Trump was asking the Russians to talk to his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. 

Oh, wait, he already did that. Cohen’s current address: 

Mr. Michael Cohen

Federal Correctional Institution

2 Mile Drive

Otisville, New York  10963

 

If you’d like to drop him a line, please do.

 

Sorry, where was I? 

Ah…“The other thing.” Trump continues. “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that [then-Vice President Joe] Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me.” 

This is not difficult to grasp, although Ranking Member Devin Nunes and most of the other Republicans involved in the hearings don’t grasp it. Trump is telling the new Ukrainian head of state that under the previous Ukrainian head of state, a company called Burisma, for whom Hunter Biden worked, should have been investigated. But Vice President Biden – who just so happens to be running against Trump in 2020 – interfered in the investigation. 

Could he please look into that?

 

Zelensky’s response is opaque; but he seems to indicate he’ll do as Trump wishes. “First of all I understand and I’m knowledgeable about the situation,” he assures the President of the United States. He goes on to add, “the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate….He or she will look into the situation, specifically the company that you mentioned in this issue.” 

So, there’s the key. To put it plainly Trump wants an investigation, aimed at Joe and Hunter Biden. 

Zelensky wants the Javelins, which his country will pay for and the nearly $400 million worth of military aid which Congress has appropriated. That aid was okayed by the Pentagon ($250 million) and the State Department ($141 million) in June. 

Here’s how one witness summed up the crux of the matter on Tuesday. Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman told lawmakers, “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the political benefits of the president’s [Trump’s] demands.” That’s why Vindman is there, testifying under oath. That’s why, seated to his right, a State Department expert on Ukraine, Jennifer Williams, assigned to the staff of Vice President Mike Pence, is also there. That’s why three witnesses last week testified, and two more would on Tuesday afternoon, after Vindman and Williams were done. 

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist.

 

To be frank, I hate that cliché. In this case, it wouldn’t take a pig farmer, or a pig, and no offense to either, to grasp the “political benefits” that would accrue for President Trump. 

Jordan, of course, either doesn’t grasp the truth; or he does, but doesn’t want the American people to hear the pig squeal. 

If you have never watched Jordan question a witness, imagine an angry wrestling coach (which he once was) lambasting a wrestler who has just blown a match. Every performance I’ve seen so far has been the same and I watch a lot. Jordan keeps insisting that there are four “facts” the Democrats can’t get around. 

He’s loud and angry every time he ticks them off, and he ticks them off several times every day. So: 

1.     President Trump says the call was great, even if the White House meeting Zelensky wanted was clearly tied to an investigation; and by golly (Jordan uses “by golly” when he talks; but the words still come out as a shout), there was no quid pro quo involving an investigation in return for military aid. 

2.     President Zelensky has said he felt no pressure to investigate. 

3.     The Ukrainians never carried out any investigation. So, no harm, no foul. 

4.     The Ukrainians eventually got the military aid they wanted! End of the whole impeachment debate.

 

Again, it’s not hard to knock Jordan’s defense to pieces, even before we go digging deeper into testimony. 

 

A pig could probably tell Trump was lying. 

Point First: We all know Trump lies with incredible regularity and even a warped kind of skill. Scientists now say that pigs are the fourth most intelligent animal species, trailing only chimps, dolphins, and elephants. A pig listening to Trump could probably tell you the man lies. 

Point Second: President Zelensky still needs U.S. military support today; and he still wants to meet in the White House. He’s not going to say anything bad about Trump, so long as that’s the case. 

Point Third: By early September, Zelensky was preparing to announce the start of the investigation Trump wanted in an interview on CNN. 

Let Fareed Zakaria, of CNN, explain what happened. “We had been negotiating with President Zelensky and his office for a while, for months, to try to get an interview with him anyway, ever since he was elected President.” 

Once news of the whistleblower complaint surfaced, “it became clear to us that the interview was off.” 

In stark terms, the “quo” was about to be delivered, and the “quid” would then be coming once Trump got his deal. But the free press blew up the story, and the deal had to be called off. 

Point Fourth: The military aid to Ukraine was held up from sometime in June (both Vindman and Williams testified on Tuesday that they learned about the hold on July 3, themselves) until September.

 

So, why was the aid finally released. 

Here, suppose we try a comparison even a pig might understand. Imagine that President Trump has just been caught by the First Lady, planning to have sex with a porn star. He has sent the porn lady a text message: “Meet you at 7:00 tomorrow at your place. I’m going to boink you like you’ve never been boinked before. Bring a copy of Forbes with my picture on the cover. I want to be spanked.” 

The First Lady stumbles upon the text. Trump defends himself, insisting, “Melania! Since you caught me and no boinking has occurred, there’s no reason to be mad. I’m innocent, don’t you see?” 

“Trust me,” I think the First Lady would reply, “there will definitely be no boinking for you.” 

So, that’s how you knock down Rep. Jordan’s four points – which, I’m sure, if you watch any of the other testimony this week he will loudly and endlessly repeat.

 

* 

Ms. Williams knew she was risking her career. 

IF YOU HAVEN’T watched a single minute of the hearings, I can assure you that the first five witnesses would make most Americans proud. (I didn’t have a chance to watch the last two, save briefly, Tuesday afternoon.) Ms. Williams knew she was risking her career when she agreed to come before Congress. And as surely as pigs like to roll in the mud, President Trump insulted her on Twitter because she did. Still, she answered lawmakers’ questions with a quiet dignity at all times.

Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman, preparing to testify under oath.

 

 

Lt. Col. Vindman showed bravery equal to hers, and has shown bravery before. He wears a Purple Heart on his U.S. Army uniform and a combat infantry badge, which he earned in Iraq in 2004. 

And before we go on, let me say, as a former Marine – who volunteered to go to Vietnam twice – but through dumb luck didn’t get sent – I was appalled by the cowardly attacks several GOP lawmakers tried to make. One Republican questioned Vindman’s right to wear a uniform to the hearings. Vindman smiled and explained. Army officers on duty (as he was) and appearing on Capitol Hill are expected to wear the uniform. At the White House, he’d be in a suit and tie. 

Here, he was following regulations. 

 

The most craven line of attack was launched by Republican counselor Steve Castor, who always does the opening round of questioning for their side. Was Vindman, he wondered, perhaps feeling “left out” of the chain of command as decisions about the future of Ukraine were made? Was he unhappy to be sidelined by a new supervisor? Even more ominously, what about that job offer the Ukrainians made? Wasn’t it true, Castor asked, squinting at Vindman, as if sizing up a man he expected to lie, that he had been offered the job of Minister of Defense in Ukraine? 

You knew at that moment that Castor and the men who had hired him to smear people like Vindman had no shame. He was hinting that Vindman wasn’t a patriot, Purple Heart and twenty years of military service be damned! (We’ve already seen similar lines of attack from several contemptible pundits on Fox News.) Instead, he was angling for a top post with a foreign country. He was not really a good American, at all. 

Watching at home, I wanted to vomit at that moment. I secretly wished Vindman might rise from the witness table, stride to the dais, reach up and grab Castor by the throat and throttle the bum. 

(A quick check of the records indicates that, as suspected, Castor has never donned the uniform or dodged flying lead.) 

Luckily for Castor, the colonel kept his cool. He said the idea that he had actually been offered the top defense position in Ukraine was “comical.” He said it was “preposterous” to think he’d be interested, even if it had.

 

* 

Likely to encourage Russia to pursue more aggressive attacks. 

AS PER THE RULES of the committee, at the start of Tuesday hearings, Daniel Goldman, the Democrats’ counselor, had first opportunity to question witnesses. At one point, he asked Lt. Col. Vindman if he was aware of any evidence (as President Trump and Rudy Giuliani believed) that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election? 

“I am not,” he replied. 

Are you aware, Goldman asked, that this conspiracy theory was promoted by Vladimir Putin? 

“I am well aware of that fact,” the colonel said. “It is the consensus of the entire intelligence community that the Russians interfered in the U.S. election in 2016.” 

What about the idea that Vice President Biden interfered in some investigation in Ukraine? Was either witness aware of any credible evidence of that? 

“No,” said Vindman. 

“No, I am not,” Ms. Williams replied.

 

Goldman asked Vindman what languages he spoke. “I speak Russian and Ukrainian,” he said, hesitated a moment, and added with fine comic timing, “and a little bit of English.” Goldman laughed. So did the audience in the hearing room. Vindman seemed pleased with his own joke. 

Rep. Jordan still looked mad. 

Why, Goldman wondered, was it so important that Ukraine get the White House meeting Zelensky wanted – and especially the military aid? Vindman said the meeting was partly “symbolic.” A meeting would show the U.S. still had Ukraine’s back. If the military assistance were not forthcoming, it “would likely encourage Russia” to pursue more aggressive attacks. This would further undermine “Ukrainian sovereignty, European security, and U.S. security.”  

Vindman testified that the call memorandum for July 25 left out two important details. He said he tried to have the record adjusted. Zelensky, he said, had specifically mentioned to President Trump that an investigation of “Burisma” would be conducted. Ms. Williams and the colonel had taken notes during the call. Both agreed that the name of that single company had come up.

 

Was it “nefarious,” Vindman was asked, that the word “Burisma” was left out of the July 25 call memorandum? No, he said. He said that the call memorandum was “substantially correct.” Ms. Williams agreed. 

A smile briefly passed over Ranking Member Nunes’s face. 

Republicans have been at great pains during all the hearings to convince viewers that what Trump always cared about most in dealing with Ukraine was rooting out corruption generally, before the Ukrainians got the aid. 

Had Trump mentioned “corruption” in this call, Goldman asked? 

No, said Vindman. 

No, agreed Williams. 

Goldman reminded everyone that both witnesses had taken notes during that famous call. Nunes started to frown.

 

What about a call that took place on April 21, Goldman asked, when President Trump congratulated Zelensky about his election victory? Both witnesses agree the word “corruption” never came up. 

The official White House readout, however, says the two presidents talked about how to “root out corruption” in Ukraine. 

Part of a White House coverup, Goldman wondered? 

Vindman said the readout might differ because it was also a “messaging tool.” Mentioning corruption specifically would send a signal to the Ukrainian people that the U.S. wanted to bolster the rule of law in their country.

 

Castor had the next chance to question the witnesses. He’s a skilled questioner and got Williams and Vindman to say just enough, so that a particularly stupid pig might believe President Trump was innocent.

This is a pig.

 

But the basics of the witnesses’ testimony were clear. Vindman was involved in a July 10 meeting, with representatives of Ukraine. During that meeting, Ambassador Gordon Sondland told the three Ukrainians present that if Zelensky wanted a meeting with Trump, then the Ukrainian leader was going to have to say publicly that the investigation Donald J. Trump wanted was going to take place. Vindman said he told Sondland this request was “inappropriate” and “had nothing to do with national security policy.” 

Like every other previous witness, Ms. Williams agreed. The call was troubling in all kinds of ways.

 

* 

Death threats – and from the president? 

EACH MEMBER OF THE Committee had a five-minute turn to ask questions. The Republicans kept trying to show that the Ukrainians couldn’t have felt any pressure about the military aid being delayed, because they didn’t know it was delayed. Williams testified about a meeting on September 1, in Warsaw, between President Zelensky and her boss, Vice President Pence. The first question the Ukrainian leader put to Mr. Pence had to do with the delay. 

In other words, he was feeling the pressure no later than September 1. 

The free press in the United States had broken the story of the delay a few days before. That’s what the free press is supposed to do. 

Honest to god, if you haven’t been watching, I swear that several GOP lawmakers used their entire five minutes to shout about how the original whistleblower had never been seen! Why weren’t they being allowed to question that whistleblower! On television! Right this moment! What diabolical Democratic plot was this! Rep. Jordan repeatedly accused Chairman Schiff of lying, when he said he didn’t know who the whistleblower was.

 

A rational observer might think that having two live witnesses to question would be enough. Or that having the three who testified last week was a fine start. Or that it might be wise to prepare for the two fresh witnesses scheduled that afternoon. You might think that 3,500 pages of witness testimony, by ten witnesses  combined, released so far, would be a good place to focus. 

No, Rep. Nunes grumbled. The Democrats didn’t care about the truth! He demanded to know who the whistleblower was, and he wanted that person to appear before the committee at once! 

Besides, the Ukrainians got the military aid, didn’t they, Rep. John Ratcliffe reminded us all. 

End of story. 

Case closed. 

The pigs were safe in the pen.

 

Chairman Schiff took a moment to note that the military aid was not released till September 11, meaning there had been a delay of at least ten weeks. 

He noted that the White House was made aware that a whistleblower complaint had been lodged on August 15. 

On September 9, the House Intelligence Committee announced that it would be holding hearings because it had come to the Schiff’s attention that the whistleblower complaint had not been forwarded to Congress, as required by law. 

Schiff noted that it was on September 10 that the House Intelligence Committee formally requested the whistleblower’s complaint be delivered to Congress. 

Presto, like the First Lady catching the president in a plot to boink a porn star, the people involved in withholding the nearly $400 million in military aid relented and let it flow the next day. 

Continuing with our analogy, President Trump would not get bonus points with the First Lady if the next day, after he was caught planning the boinking, he bought her a new car. 

Meanwhile, the Ukrainians had to be feeling immense pressure. In their fight against Russia, thousands of Ukrainians have already been killed.

 

Ranking Member Nunes took the second cheap shot of the day. He wanted to know exactly who Vindman talked to, after he first lodged a protest about the demands by Sondland (on July 10) and Trump (in the July 25 call) that the Ukrainians agree to investigate if they wanted a White House meeting and the military aid. Vindman admitted that he talked to two individuals, George Kent (who testified last week), and a member of a U.S. intelligence agency. Nunes demanded to know which agency and he really wanted a name. Vindman’s lawyer said he wouldn’t provide either. Schiff warned that no question which might lead to identification of the whistleblower would be allowed. Nunes told Vindman he could answer or “take the Fifth.” 

Vindman’s lawyer rejected the insinuation that his client might be hiding any wrongdoing on his part. His client was testifying under rules set down by Chairman Schiff. The identity of the whistleblower would not be revealed, nor any details that might lead to his or her identification. 

That pissed Nunes off. Goddam! Where was that whistleblower at? He characterized the whole day of testimony as “this impeachment inquisition” and decided to ignore some rather glaring facts.

 

For example: According to the whistleblower’s lawyer, his client had been the target of numerous death threats, should his or her identity be found out. The F.B.I. was already investigating, including one email in which the sender said the whistleblower “should be shot.” 

Had anyone else threatened, at least obliquely, the whistleblower’s life? Why, yes: President Trump. He compared the whistleblower to a spy. “You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart? Right?” he asked reporters. “The spies and treason, we used to handle it a little differently than we do now.” 

Yes, the penalty was death. 

Vindman, himself, had been the target of death threats. The U.S. Army had already decided that for his safety and the safety of his family that they would be relocated, and a security detail provided. 

You might think Nunes would care.

Ranking member Nunes trying to remember if he has ever seen a pig.