May 26, 2020
American media CNN, MSNBC and others not even mention this at all
Rep. Jim Jordan Calls on Pompeo State Department — Release Documents Tying Suspected Whistleblower Eric Ciaramella to Hunter Biden and Burisma!
By Joe Hoft – May 15, 2020
Representative Jim Jordan requested the US State Department under Mike Pompeo to turn over documents related to Obama Deep State employee Eric Ciaramella and Ukrainian firm Burisma.
Sara Carter reported overnight:
Republicans are demanding that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo turn over a broad scope of unredacted Obama-Biden State Department documents pertaining to the corrupt Ukrainian company that was at the center of the impeachment inquiry earlier this year against President Donald Trump.
In a document sent to Pompeo, Jordan wrote:
“I write regarding documents that the State Department recently released pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA),” stated Jordan, in a letter to Pompeo on Thursday. “Although these documents are partially redacted, they appear to shed new light on the actions of State Department employees during the Obama-Biden Administration in relation to the corrupt Ukrainian energy company, Burisma Holdings, and its founder, Mykola Zlochevsky.”
Jordan requested that the information be delivered to the committee by May 28. He asked for:
- Unredacted copies of all documents released pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act relating to Burisma Holdings, Mykola Zlochevsky, or Hunter Biden;
- All documents and communications referring or relating to Burisma Holdings or Mykola Zlochevsky for the period January 1, 2014, to January 20, 2017; and
- All documents and communications referring or relating to Hunter Biden, Christopher Heinz, or Devon Archer for the period January 1, 2014, to January 20, 2017.
According to Jordan the State Department documents also reveal that the alleged “whistleblower” who began the partisan impeachment against Trump “also played a role in facilitating the Obama-Biden Administration’s interactions with the Ukrainian government relating to Burisma and Hunter Biden.”
Jordan told Pompeo that the documents reportedly detail “how the ‘whistleblower,’ as a National Security Council (NSC) detailee, hosted a White House meeting that took place with Ukrainian prosecutors in January 2016 regarding a concern that Hunter Biden’s role with Burisma could complicate a potential prosecution of the company’s wrongdoing.”
We first reported on the meeting at the White House involving the suspected fraudulent impeachment whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, in early November 2019.
According to Stephen McIntyre a demand that Ukrainian top prosecutor Viktor Shokin be fired as a condition for an IMF loan, almost certainly originated with Biden staff.
The demand was first announced to Ukrainian prosecutors at a January 19, 2016 meeting with US officials hosted by Eric Ciaramella.
A search on the White House visitor logs during the final year (2016) of the Obama administration lists Eric Ciaramella over 200 times. Ciaramella hosted a meeting with Ukrainian diplomat Andrii Telizhenko on January 19, 2016 in the Obama White House.
And we also discovered that Artem Sytnyk, the director of Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU), a Soros group, who leaked documents on kickbacks to Manafort during the 2016 election, was also at the meeting.
Fool Nelson first reported this on October 12 before Ciaramella was alleged publicly to be the whistleblower.
We reported that this was the only listed White House meeting attended by Andrii Telizhenko in 2016. This was also the meeting where Hunter Biden was discussed. This was the meeting where Ukrainians were told to end their investigation of Hunter Biden. And White House expert Eric Ciaramella HOSTED the January 19, 2016 meeting.
Other individuals with shady backgrounds visited Eric Ciaramella in the White House –
Here’s a guest from the Hudson Institute and Estonia –
(The Hudson Institute promoted a piece by George Soros where he claimed the war on drugs had failed.)
And another from Estonia –
And a Deep State Pentagon official specializing in Russia, George Tagg, Jr. –
And another connection to Soros via USAID – Suren Avanesyan – Soros reportedly received US taxpayer dollars through this agency –
Suren Avanesyan currently serves as Acting Division Chief of the Democracy and Governance Division and Senior Advisor for Rule of Law, Governance and Anti-Corruption in the Bureau for Europe and Eurasia in the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). As Division Chief, he is responsible for managing a team of senior technical advisors, project support staff and for determining strategic direction and priorities of the Democracy and Governance Division.
Here’s Bart M.J. Szewczyk from the Marshall Fund –
About the Marshall Fund –
And here’s another connected to USAid and George Soros – John VanSandt –
And another connection to the Ukraine – Joseph Wereszynski –
And the Ambassador to Lithuania –
And another from the Marshall Fund – Michael Kimmage –
And a lady from Lithuania – Solvita Aboltina – she looks nice –
And a couple more from the Baltic States – where money laundering ran high
And another from Latvia –
What were all these shady individuals from Baltic States and Soros connected entities doing with Eric Ciaramella in Obama’s White House?
Let’s hope Pompeo’s State Department addresses the House request. If not, then it’s time for Pompeo to go.
Hat tip D. Manny
Rep. Devin Nunes: Remove All Obama Holdovers from NSC — Move NSC Out of White House and Across the Potomac River (VIDEO)
February 10, 2020
Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures yesterday morning.
Rep. Nunes ripped the liberal media after their disastrous three years of lying and misleading the American public.
The leftie mainstream media TRULY is an enemy to Truth.
Rep. Nunes also urged President Trump to move the entire NSC apparatus out of the White House and across the Potomac River.
Rep. Nunes: I believe we’re going to get accountability. I believe Durham is going to get to the full story… I’ve been saying for a long time that the National Security Council that’s there at the White House, 400 and some people, he would be best to take all of those people, ship them across the Potomac, quarantine them, get them the hell away from the White House, because we know that a lot of the leaks for the last three plus years have been coming from that National Security Council. The President really only needs to have Trump appointees with him in the White House.
On Monday morning Devin Nunes expanded on his request — The California Republican called on President Trump to FIRE all Obama holdovers in the NSC and in the White House.
Rep. Nunes: We know that it is highly likely that many of the leaks that started at the very beginning of President Trump’s administration came from the National Security Council.
Trump Administration Will Remove Anti-Trump Deep State Operative Alex Vindman from NSC Following His Role in Sham Impeachment
February 6, 2020
In November Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Ron Johnson (R-WI) blasted Lt. Col Vindman in an 11-page letter written to ranking member of the House Intel Committee Devin Nunes and Rep. Jim Jordan.
Senator Johnson wrote the Congressman a letter to provide his first-hand information and perspective on events relevant to the impeachment inquiry.
Johnson traveled to Ukraine with special envoy Kurt Volker, spoke to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in person and spoke to President Trump about the hold on military aid — unlike all of the ‘witnesses’ Schiff has dragged in to testify using fourth-hand information.
Johnson clearly suggested Vindman was behind the leaks ‘outside his chain of command.’
During his trip to Ukraine Vindman told Ukrainians to ignore President Trump — Vindman actually thinks he is superior to Trump even though he is an inferior official in the intel department.
Vindman, during his closed-door testimony also flatly denied he knew the identity of the whistleblower (Eric Ciaramella); however, it is believed he was the primary source for Eric Ciaramella.
Vindman’s boss Tim Morrison testified that Vindman was untrustworthy, was a leaker who thought he was in charge.
On Thursday night news broke that Vindman will be removed from the National Security Council!
Good riddance!
Bloomberg reported:
The White House is weighing a plan to dismiss Alexander Vindman from the National Security Council after he testified in President Donald Trump’s impeachment inquiry, preparing to position the move as part of a broader effort to shrink the foreign policy bureaucracy, two people familiar with the matter said.
Any moves would come after the Senate on Wednesday acquitted Trump on a near party-line vote at the conclusion of the two-week impeachment trial. The White House intends to portray any house-cleaning as part of a downsizing of the NSC staff, not retaliation, according to the people.
Will the Real Eric Ciaramella Please Stand Up? Numerous Photos Misidentify Real Deep State ‘Leaker’ – These Images Were Deep Fake Verified
February 6, 2020
A number of individuals have been labeled and identified on the Internet as the anti-Trump Deep State ‘whistleblower’ Eric Ciaramella. Below we identify a few of the individuals who were misidentified as Eric Ciaramella.
Yaacov Apelbaum put together information regarding the many individuals misidentified as Deep State’s Eric Ciaramella.
Below is a list of some of those individuals as well as a picture of the real leaker, Ciaramella.
On October 30th, Paul Sperry announced at RealClearInvestigations.com in a post that the so-called ‘whistleblower’ in lying Adam Schiff’s fake impeachment sham is none other than Eric Ciaramella. This was old news to us at TGP as well as Dan Bongino and others on the web. (We first reported on Ciaramella on October 11th.)
But in Sperry’s post, he notes the exact pronunciation for Ciaramella’s name – (pronounced char-a-MEL-ah) –
Bongino suspected that Sperry was trying to hint at something as the pronunciation of a name is not usually included in posts like Sperry’s. What Bongino suggested was that there is a connection between Sperry’s article and the Grassley and Johnson letter – Char-a-MEL-ah is the same ‘Charlie’ in the Strzok and Page communications.
This is why Schiff wanted to keep his identity hidden. Not only because Ciaramella is a clearly a leaker and is culpable for crimes due to his leaking but because he was spying on President Trump in the White House and was involved in the Russia collusion scam as well.
As we reported on October 11th, in a hit piece on conservatives in July, 2017, Yahoo reported that Mike Cernovich targeted an individual who worked for former National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster, claiming the individual wanted to ‘sabotage’ President Trump. The article also said the individual claimed he is ‘pro-Ukraine and anti-Russia’.
Cernovich reported in June, 2017, that McMaster promoted Ciaramella in spite of his connections to Susan Rice in Obama’s White House:
West Wing officials confirmed to Cernovich Media that Eric Ciaramella, who worked closely with Susan Rice while at NSC, was recently promoted to be H.R. McMaster’s personal aide. Ciaramella will have unfettered access to McMaster’s conversations with foreign leaders.
Others noted Ciaramella was Obama’s NSC Director for the Ukraine. This connects him and his team at the NSC to Joe Biden. Biden was Obama’s lead in the Ukraine so it’s implausible that Ciararmella and his team were not connected to Biden. Schiff’s leakers are connected to Biden also.
Fool Nelson on Twitter was one of the first to out Ciaramella –
Another Internet sleuth, Greg Rubini, may have been the first to identify Ciaramella. Rubini however noted that Ciaramella was in the White House at an event and was seated directly behind Melania Trump –
This turned out to be incorrect as the individual in the picture above with Melania Trump was not Ciaramella. The individual identified as Eric Ciaramella is Hugo Verges, he is French President Emanuel Macron’s advisor for Latin America. This image was taken prior to the state diner on April 24, 2018.
Democrats failed to impeach Trump, but they won’t give up trying – it’s all they’ve got
by Nebojsa Malic
Even before President Donald Trump was elected US president, Democrats began talking about impeachment. Now that it has failed, will they finally accept the result of the 2016 election? Don’t get your hopes up.
Trump’s acquittal in the Senate on Wednesday was a foregone conclusion, given as it takes two thirds of the senators present to convict. The only way for 20 Republicans to switch sides was for the House case to be open and shut – something that only Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) and ‘Russiagate’ truthers in the media actually believed.
In the end, the sole Republican to break ranks was Mitt Romney, and only on one of the articles. Not guilty, exonerated, case closed, let’s “move on” – as Democrats themselves advised in 1999, after the same thing happened to Bill Clinton.
Not so fast. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) has rejected the verdict, calling it “meaningless” because what happened in the Senate “wasn’t a trial.” It’s a retreat to last week’s talking points, arguing that the Senate should have called additional witnesses and documents that the House didn’t care to obtain before rushing to impeach back in December.
Never mind that doing this would have meant the House process was flawed, fatally undercut the second article – “obstruction of Congress” – or that the House managers themselves objected to any new evidence being introduced. If you’re expecting logic rather than lawfare, you’re in the wrong town.
Democrats began talking impeachment from the second Trump took office, having failed to prevent that from happening through a variety of long-shot schemes such as “Hamilton electors.” Their initial strategy was to allege “emoluments” and harp on Trump’s undisclosed tax returns, before settling on “Russiagate.” Then the Mueller Report came out and proved to be a dud of epic proportions. Hopes to at least get obstruction of justice charges out of it were decisively crushed by Attorney General William Barr.
Report came out and proved to be a dud of epic proportions. Hopes to at least get obstruction of justice charges out of it were decisively crushed by Attorney General William Barr.
Under tremendous pressure to find something – anything – to impeach Trump over, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi turned to Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff, a fellow Californian. Schiff seized upon a phone call between Trump and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, which he was told about by staffers in touch with their former colleagues inside the intelligence community.
Schiff seized on Trump’s reference to Joe Biden’s bragging about getting a corruption prosecutor in Ukraine fired, to claim that this amounted to “soliciting foreign interference” in the 2020 election, since Barack Obama’s former VP was the front-runner for the Democrats’ presidential nomination.
While Schiff and his crew did their best to conjure a crazy conspiracy involving Trump holding up military aid for political leverage – mind-reading and inventing fake transcripts along the way – their case was ultimately smoke and mirrors. Zelensky himself said he was not being extorted, and the parade of other witnesses from within the very bureaucracy Trump had sworn to purge (but obviously hadn’t) had only their personal, anti-Trump opinions to offer.
Paradoxically, impeachment only made Trump stronger – and more popular, if the latest polls are anything to go by. By contrast, Democrats have gone from one defeat to the next this week, starting with Monday’s fiasco at the Iowa caucuses and continuing with Pelosi’s tantrum at Trump’s State of the Union on Tuesday.
“This impeachment was a destructive debacle in every conceivable respect, but don’t worry I’m sure [Democrats] will change their behavior moving forward, they have a well-established track record of taking responsibility for failure,” quipped political journalist Michael Tracey after the Senate acquittal.
If Trump wins re-election in November – which increasingly looks like it might happen – expect the Democrats to try to impeach him again. What for? It doesn’t matter, any excuse will do.
Simply put, they have to. In retrospect, impeachment seems to have always been a coping mechanism for 2016, the election that neither Hillary Clinton nor her party ever recovered from losing.
Clinton herself offered more proof of that on Wednesday, accusing 52 Senate Republicans of betraying their oath to the Constitution and saying the US was “entering dangerous territory for our democracy.”
She’s actually correct about that, though not in a sense she may have intended. Democracy works only so long as all participants agree to abide by electoral results. Refusing to accept defeat and attempting to rules-lawyer one’s way out would be bothersome enough at a board game night, but is downright toxic when it infects national politics.
Kaiser Report co-host Stacy Herbert summed it up best, calling the last three years “one horrible remake of ‘Goodbye, Lenin’ in which the entire political and media classes have constructed an elaborate alternative reality so as to avoid having Hillary encounter any further distress which might compound her humiliation.”
Unlike in the 2003 German film, nothing so far has been capable of bursting this particular delusion bubble – which means that America’s long national nightmare is nowhere near over.
ROMNEY SAYS HE WILL VOTE TO CONVICT PRESIDENT TRUMP
RINO Utah senator once again sides with the Democrats, this time for historic impeachment vote
FEBRUARY 5, 2020
Republican Utah Senator Mitt Romney announced on the Senate floor that he will vote to convict President Trump on the second article of impeachment on Wednesday.
“The grave question the Constitution tasks senators to answer is whether the president committed an act so extreme and egregious that it rises to the level of a ‘high crime and misdemeanor,’” Romney said. “Yes, he did.”
IMAGE CREDITS: SENATE TELEVISION VIA GETTY IMAGES.
“The president is guilty of an appalling abuse of public trust,” Romney continued. “What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security and our fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of one’s oath of office that I can imagine.”
His break with the rest of the GOP isn’t so surprising given his disdain for and frequent betrayals of Trump in the past.
Romney’s latest betrayal came when he voted with the Democrats to seek additional witnesses in the impeachment trial last week, resulting in CPAC disinviting Romney from the annual conservative event this year.
Sean Davis of The Federalist noted that Romney’s vote to convict Trump despite not hearing from more witnesses he vote on just proves Romney was playing pure politics.
“Romney’s vote today also shows how dishonest his vote for witnesses was last week,” Davis tweeted. “He clearly didn’t believe more evidence or testimony was necessary since he’s voting to convict today. He just wanted a long, drawn-out process to damage his nemesis.”
Last fall, Romney revealed that he operated a secret Twitter account under the pseudonym “Pierre Delecto” for the sole purpose of disparaging Trump.
When Romney ran unsuccessfully for president in 2012, he sought and received Trump’s endorsement — he then denounced Trump in 2015.
Then when Romney ran for Senate in 2018, he again sought Trump’s endorsement — now he says he will vote to convict Trump in 2020.
Why was Rand banned? Sen. Paul reveals his CENSORED question at Trump impeachment trial
As Senators gathered for the last day of questioning in President Trump’s impeachment trial, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul found his question censored in a way that may have revealed the identity of the mysterious whistleblower.
With the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump nearing its final stages, senators gathered on Capitol Hill on Thursday to question the Democratic prosecution team, and Trump’s defense attorneys. However, Paul (R-Kentucky) found his question shot down by presiding Chief Justice John Roberts, who declined “to read the question as submitted.”
Paul left the chamber after Roberts’ denial.
Taking to Twitter afterwards, Paul revealed that he planned on asking whether Obama-era “partisans” within Trump’s National Security Council conspired with House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff to engineer impeachment proceedings against Trump, by sounding the alarm on the now-infamous July phone call between Trump and Ukrainain President Volodymyr Zelensky.
“Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together,” Paul’s question read. “And are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the president before there were formal House impeachment proceedings.”
Ciaramella, a CIA analyst, is widely believed to be the ‘whistleblower’ who kickstarted the impeachment inquiry by alleging that Trump tried to strong-arm Zelensky into reopening a corruption investigation into Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, and his business activities in Ukraine.
According to a recent RealClearPolitics report, Ciaramella was reportedly overheard in 2017 “plotting” with Misko to have Trump “removed from office.”
Schiff, the lead prosecutor in the impeachment trial, has both denied knowing the identity of the whistleblower and called the report of Ciaramella’s plot a “conspiracy theory.” Schiff has also repeatedly warned Republicans against naming the whistleblower, citing a need to protect his or her identity – though no statutory requirement for that actually exists.
However, Roberts’ refusal to read Ciaramella’s name and the media furor that followed Paul’s question – with mostly liberal pundits hounding the senator for “naming the whistleblower” – all but confirms that he is indeed Schiff’s source. Paul never mentioned the term “whistleblower” in his written question, yet Roberts still refused to read Ciaramella’s name. Earlier, Roberts had vowed not to read any question that might “out” the whistleblower.
Roberts was not compelled to censor Paul’s question by law. Rather, his decision was a personal one. Contrary to Schiff, the whistleblower does not enjoy a “statutory right to anonymity.” If Ciaramella is indeed the whistleblower, his only guarantee is that the intelligence community inspector-general may not name him as such.
Senators will likely vote on Friday on whether to allow testimony from additional witnesses, beyond those heard during the inquiry led by House Democrats. While Democrats have pushed for testimony from former National Security Advisor John Bolton, some Republicans have argued that if they even agree to witnesses, they intend to call on the whistleblower, conclusively revealing their identity and giving Trump his constitutional right to confront his accuser.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made clear that he will move to block any additional witnesses from testifying, bringing the trial to a speedy conclusion and acquittal as soon as possible.
BREAKING: Fired Ukrainian Prosecutor Viktor Shokin FILES FEDERAL COMPLAINT Against Joe Biden
by Jim Hoft – 1/30/2020
After leaving office in 2017, Vice President Joe Biden Bragged about strong-arming the government of Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor.
Joe Biden made the remarks during a meeting of foreign policy specialists. Biden said he, “Threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.” Biden suggested during his talk that Barack Obama was in on the threat.
In April John Solomon revealed what Biden did not tell his audience. Joe Biden had Shokin fired because he was investigating Joe Biden’s son Hunter.
Joe Biden and Democrats have then gone out on an international smear campaign to destroy Viktor Shokin’s education.
On Tuesday fired Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin filed an official complaint against Joe Biden for interference in Ukraine’s legal proceedings.
French news Les Crisis reported:
Today we present you this exclusive document: the complaint of former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin against Joe Biden for interference in the legal proceedings of Ukraine – which incidentally cites our UkraineGate investigation …
To the interim director of the National Bureau of Investigation
COMPLAINT [against Joe Biden]
On the commission of a criminal offense
(under article 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine)
I have read and understood Article 63 of the Constitution of Ukraine and the liability provided for in Article 383 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine “Slanderous denunciation of an offense”.
Shokin V.M. (signature).
During the period 2014-2016, the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine was conducting a preliminary investigation into a series of serious crimes committed by the former Minister of Ecology of Ukraine Mykola Zlotchevsky and by the managers of the company “Burisma Holding Limited “(Cyprus), the board of directors of which included, among others, Hunter Biden, son of Joseph Biden, then vice-president of the United States of America.
The investigation into the above-mentioned crimes was carried out in strict accordance with Criminal Law and was under my personal control as the Prosecutor General of Ukraine.
Owing to my firm position on the above-mentioned cases regarding their prompt and objective investigation, which should have resulted in the arrest and the indictment of the guilty parties, Joseph Biden developed a firmly hostile attitude towards me which led him to express in private conversations with senior Ukrainian officials, as well as in his public speeches, a categorical request for my immediate dismissal from the post of Attorney General of Ukraine in exchange for the sum of US $ 1 billion in as a financial guarantee from the United States for the benefit of Ukraine.
The facts I have described above are confirmed, among other things, by the official interview of Joseph Biden published in the media (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHoXh42BraI), where he declares that Ukraine will not receive money if I remain in my post as Attorney General.
Throughout the last months of 2015 and the first months of 2016 Joseph Biden, taking advantage of his position, came several times on official visits to Ukraine in order to negotiate with the leaders of the country my eviction and, consequently, the closing of the objective investigation into the offenses committed by persons associated with the company “Burisma Holding Limited” (Cyprus), including the son of the aforementioned US official.
Due to continued pressure from the Vice President of the United States Joseph Biden to oust me from the job by blackmailing the allocation of financial assistance, I, as the man who places the State interests above my personal interests, I agreed to abandon the post of Prosecutor General of Ukraine.
After my resignation caused by illegal pressure, no active investigation into the offenses concerning the company “Burisma Holding Limited” (Cyprus) was carried out and, therefore, the persons implicated in these offenses were not identified, nor arrested or charged.
According to the conclusions of the International Law Association of 18.04.2017, made by the doctor of law, Professor O.O. Merezhko, at the time vice-president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the request of the Vice-President of the United States Joseph Biden concerning my ousting from the post of the Attorney General of Ukraine as a condition for the granting of financial (economic) assistance is qualified as pressure, which represents interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine on the part of a foreign power in violation of one of the principles of international law.
Moreover, the facts of pressure on me as Prosecutor General of Ukraine from Joseph Biden in the circumstances described above are confirmed by an independent journalistic investigation under the name “UkraineGate” conducted and published by the French online media “Les-Crises.fr” available at this link https://ukrainegate.info/part-2-not-so-dormant-investigations/
Read the rest at Les Crisis.
FLASHBACK: John Bolton Described Trump and Zelensky Call as “Warm and Cordial” Back in August Before He Was Fired (VIDEO)
January 29, 2020
Well, this didn’t make any headlines this week.
Just one month before former National Security Advisor John Bolton was fired he praised President Trump in his phone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky.
In an interview in August John Bolton praised President Trump and called his call with Zelensky “warm and cordial.”
Cristina Laila reported this Bolton interview with Radio Free Europe in August.
Via Mark Levin.
Tom's Blog 