On Tuesday, a federal judge dismissed a complaint filed by Trump impeachment witness Lieut. Colonel Alexander Vindman claiming that previous President Donald Trump as well as others conducted an intimidating and harassment effort against Vindman in connection with his congressional testimony.
The 29-page decision was issued by Obama appointee Judge James Boasberg of the United States District Court finding that Vindman’s testimony failed to show a planned plot involving Trump, Trump Jr., Rudy Guilani, and others. Democrats viewed Vindman’s description of listening in on Trump’s phone discussion with Ukrainian Pres. Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a quid pro quo, which contributed to Trump’s unsuccessful impeachment trial.
“Taken as true, Plaintiff’s pleaded facts undoubtedly show that Defendants launched harsh, mean-spirited, as well as at times deceptive assaults against him,” said Boasberg. “However, political hacking by itself does not violate the relevant statute.”
Vindman stated that after being asked to appear before Congress, he was exposed to “a highly dangerous campaign of witness tampering by President Trump and a team of conspirators,” in an attempt to scare him into concealing his evidence.
The suit also names Trump advisers Dan Scavino and Julia Hahn as defendants. Vindman claimed the gang conspired to derail his Army career and remove Vindman and as well as his brother, Yevgeny Vindman, from their roles in the White House.
“While it is a close call, Vindman’s facts don’t really convincingly establish that Defendants colluded to frighten him in order to stop him from witnessing or even doing his job, or to illegally retaliate against him,” Boasberg said in his judgment on Tuesday.
Vindman’s facts failed to support the assertion that “a conspirator committed an unlawful overt act in furtherance of the common conspiracy,” according to Boasberg.
Vindman alleged that Trump conditionalized military assistance on Zelenskyy investigating Hunter Biden, the son of then-presidential contender Joe Biden, for his ties to corrupt Ukrainian businesspeople. Democrats saw the agreement as a tactic to damage Trump’s electoral opponent and strengthen his position ahead of the 2020 election.
The transcript of the phone call, which was ultimately made public, did not appear to support the Democrats’ assertions. While Trump appeared to propose a probe of Hunter Biden’s ties to the Ukrainian oil business Burisma, he made no mention of military assistance.
Trump claimed his previous decision to cancel $400 million in funding to Ukraine had no influence on Zelenskyy’s proposal that Hunter Biden’s business transactions be investigated.
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
