Bureaucrat witness suggests something sinister about the transcript


Alexander Vindman, who served his country honorably, now serves in a bureaucratic role in the National Security Council. Vindman does not make policy; he serves as a clerk. He leaked or had someone leak his opening statement, which tells us something of his motivations and credibility.

His statement focused on his contention that he held a consensus opinion, and that opinion was the correct one.

According to the NY Times’ leaks from “three anonymous sources,” Vindman leaked the readouts of the President’s Ukraine call without permission. We don’t know if those receiving them had the authority to read them or who they were.

These Ukraine supporters working for this President have said they wanted to maintain bipartisan support for Ukraine and felt the President’s actions endangered that. However, we know there was meddling in the 2016 election by Democrats in Ukraine.

As we mentioned in our report yesterday, Vindman was there to say he felt the transcript wasn’t accurate.

Vindman tried to change the original transcript compiled by the White House transcribers. Some of his edits were successful, but two were not, the sources told the Times. The sources are Democrats, and the unauthorized leaks are meant to delegitimize the transcript of the call, as we suspected yesterday.

The alleged omissions are not credible to the Sentinel because they are leaks by anonymous sources who have an agenda. We also don’t know why the omissions were rejected or who rejected them.

According to the NY Times:

“The omissions, Colonel Vindman said, included Mr. Trump’s assertion that there were recordings of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. discussing Ukraine corruption, and an explicit mention by Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, of Burisma Holdings, the energy company whose board employed Mr. Biden’s son Hunter.”

He said the mention of the recordings is where the third ellipses appears in the transcript. You decide if this is important. From what we can see, it does not fundamentally change a thing. Read the transcript below.

Burisma does appear in the transcript. It says, at one point, the ‘company,’ and he would have substituted Burisma for the company.

The White House transcribers are intelligence officials with the highest security clearance.

You can read the transcript below and fill in his alleged changes, according to the Times.


The Times also called it the ‘reconstructed transcript’ twice, but it was the original transcript, compiled as they usually are.

Vindman opened the door to destroying the credibility of the transcript with his claim. Two of his several changes were rejected, although he offered no motive or any necessary details.

We also don’t know why the omissions were rejected or who rejected them.

Ultimately, Vindman doesn’t get to be the President. He doesn’t get to decide. He isn’t even a policymaker at the NSC. The President doesn’t even know who he is.

Speaking with former Sr. Adviser to Ronald Reagan, Ed Rollins, Lou Dobbs read from what he called Vindman’s “mind-boggling” opening statement. He condemned the implication that Vindman had “superior opinion and judgment” on national security compared to President Trump.

“What you are seeing and hearing there is a reference to the deep state, to the permanent bureaucracy, and a lieutenant colonel who obviously believes he has a superior judgment to the President of the United States!” Dobbs said, calling the remarks “chilling.”

He saw it as a reference to the deep state. Rollins agreed, blasting the White House official.


The White House could have used a committed bureaucrat like Colonel Vindman when three Democrats wrote a letter asking Ukraine to interfere in the Mueller probe in 2018, claiming they would withhold aid. He could have been helpful when a Democrat operative asked Ukraine to interfere in the 2016 election?

What about the audio evidence of interference in 2016? Of course, the President has the right to want an investigation.

Colonel Vindman said he “did not think the call was proper.”  It wasn’t proper “for the President to ask President Zelensky to investigate a political rival.” Biden is the political rival who publicly bragged about extorting Ukraine with tax dollars to help his son, and the Colonel is not a policymaker. You decide if he’s right.

Vindman sabotaged the President from within the White House. Vindman worked for Ukrainians on how to handle the President while working for the President.

“A US gov. employee who has reportedly been advising two gov’s?” Rudy Giuliani tweeted, referring to Vindman. “No wonder he is confused and feels pressure.”


Ukraine Call Transcript by Johannah Winter on Scribd

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
3 years ago

(VINDMAN Opening Statement, Page 5, Paragraph 6) – “On July 25, 2019, the call occurred. I listened in on the call in the Situation Room with colleagues from the NSC and the office of the Vice President. As the transcript is in the public record, we are all aware of what was said.”
(VINDMAN Opening Statement, Page 5, Paragraph 7) – “I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to DEMAND that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine.”
Colonel Vindman Lied – The Presidential Call Transcript, which he himself confirmed was accurate, contains NO DEMAND, quite the opposite;
(Presidential Call Transcript, Page 3, First Paragraph) – The transcript uses words like “WHATEVER you can do” and “IF THAT’S POSSIBLE.”
(Presidential Call Transcript, Page 4, First Paragraph) – AND “WHATEVER YOU CAN DO” and “IF YOU CAN”.
These are hardly words that would indicate any DEMAND or PRESSURE being made !
VINDMAN whiile under questioning about the differences between his words and the Presidential Call Transcript, which he confirmed as accurate, began to hem and haw, then VINDMAN actually says that ANY REQUEST the president makes should be considered a “DEMAND”.
(VINDMAN Opening Statement, Page 5, Paragraph 7) – “The united states and ukraine are and MUST REMAIN STRATEGIC PARTNERS, working together to realize the shared vision of a stable, prosperous, and democratic Ukraine that is integrated into the Euro-Atlantic community.”
The following account of LTC VINDMAN’s words and actions are completely accurate to the best of my recollection and have been corroborated by others.
He was apologetic of American culture, laughed about Americans not being educated or worldly, and really talked up Obama and globalism to the point of uncomfortable.
He would speak with the Russian Soldiers and laugh as if at the expense of the US personnel. It was so uncomfortable and unprofessional, one of the GS employees came and told me everything above. I walked over and sat within earshot of VINDMAN, and sure enough, all was confirmed. One comment truly struck me as odd, and it was with respect to Americans’ falsely thinking they’re exceptional, when he said, ‘He [Obama] is working on that now.’ And he said it with a snide ‘I know a secret’ look on his face. I honestly don’t know what it meant, it just sounded like an odd thing to say. Regardless, after hearing him bash America a few times in front of subordinates, Russians, and GS employees, as well as, hearing an earful about globalization, Obama’s plan, etc…I’d had enough. I tapped him on the shoulder and asked him to step outside.
At that point I verbally reprimanded him for his actions and I’ll leave it at that, so as not to be unprofessional myself. The bottom-line is LTC VINDMAN was a partisan Democrat at least as far back as 2012. So much so, junior officers and soldiers felt uncomfortable around him. This is not your professional, field-grade officer, who has the character and integrity to do the right thing. Do not let the uniform fool you…he is a political activist in uniform. I pray our nation will drop this hate, vitriol and division, and unite as our founding fathers intended!

3 years ago

So it isn’t proper to investigate a political rival. So it is even worse to fabricate a story about a political rival and try to destroy a sitting president with that fabrication.
The former situation is called bad form, while the latter is high treason.

3 years ago

When in the military in ’60’s and seventies we were told that it was illegal to engage in political activites in uniform. Why is this butt head parading around in his?
He is also disobeying a direct order of the Commander in Chief not to testify. He should be in Levenworth.

Gordon Gooch
Gordon Gooch
3 years ago

This POS should be stripped of his rank and dishonorably discharged and deprived of his pension and any emoluments he might formerly have been entitled to.

Consign him to the demonrat facility at Leavenworth.

David O'Dowd
David O'Dowd
3 years ago

Lt. Col. Vindman is/was nothing but an office pencil pusher who is ticked off because he has not yet attained the grade of a “Full Bird Colonel” This “news story” pushes him into the limelight so that just maybe the Democratic Party may honorably bestow that grade upon him.
D.O’D. B.A. Th.M.