(TNS) When President Donald Trump, at the urging of his national security team, agreed to provide “lethal” assistance to Ukraine in order to assist the country in its battle against Russian-backed separatists in the east, it was a significant development.



Trump made the decision in December 2017, which was a major policy shift from the Obama administration, which regularly threatened to send lethal aid but never did. Obama drew a couple of “red lines” that he never enforced though.

At the time of Trump’s decision, The Hill reported:

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the administration approved the sale of Model M107A1 sniper systems and associated equipment to the country at a value of $41.5 million. The administration has not yet moved to approve sales of heavier arms requested by Ukraine’s government, including Javelin anti-tank missiles.

The move from the White House is a departure from the Obama administration, which frequently condemned Russian aggression in the Ukraine but refused to approve the sale of arms to the country’s Western-aligned government.

So there’s that.

Why, then, would one of Adam Schiff’s star witnesses in his secret squirrel impeachment inquiry hearings testify to the opposite?

And lo and behold, that testimony was provided by the ‘unassailable’ ‘Ukraine expert’ at the National Security Council, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a decorated U.S. Army officer who nonetheless should have already been shown the door simply because he is trying to undermine the commander-in-chief.

Led on by Schiff, Vindman testified that Obama sent Javelins to Ukraine when, in fact, he did not.

The Washington Examiner’s Byron York found it odd as he went through interview transcripts that Vindman said “a fairly significant number of Javelins” were sent to Ukraine.

Hmmm.. Now why would Vindman say something like this?

The “top guy at NSC for Ukraine” should know better, right? And yet, he was so “concerned” that his boss, President Trump, was doing something wrong?

Based on what? If you are the subject matter “expert” for a certain country and you don’t even know when a major policy shift (providing lethal aid) occurred, then a) you’re not the expert; or b) you’re lying to help the president’s political enemies.

And if you lied under oath, LTC Vindman, well, that’s perjury.

We said it before: Decorated or not, Vindman should have been fired already by the president who, as commander-in-chief, does not have to put up with men and women in uniform specifically undermining him or his foreign policy decisions.

  • We need your help to grow, pure and simple. If you like our no holds barred approach to defending President Trump and our republic, share our stories, make sure to tell your friends about this site, and click the red bell in the right corner for push notifications. We don’t do a regular ‘email newsletter’ anymore because it gets blocked. 

About us (you should read this)

GOT SOMETHING TO SAY? COMMENT BELOW



6
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x