September 12, 2023 • 48 mins
This week Rosie has a very special guest, American hero, Alexander Vindman.Vindman, in honoring his oath to democracy and the constitution, reported Trump's quid pro quo phone call to Ukraine's President Zelensky.
Rosie and Alexander talk about his childhood as an immigrant growing up in NYC, his service careers in both the military and the White House, and the decision to expose Trump's abuse of power, leading to Trump's first impeachment.
Here they discuss what public service, honor, and love of country really mean in America, as well as how doing the right thing has affected Vindman and his family.
https://vvfnd.org/https://votevets.org
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
Well, hey, everybody, you have found me and welcome to
Onward with Rosie o'donald. I don't like to talk about
myself in the third person like that. Isn't that weird,
Rosie o'donald. It's me. I can't just say onward with me?
Could I? Okay? It's onward with me. Today we have
an amazing guest, Alexander Vidman. And who is Alexander Vindman?
Most of you know, but I'm going to give you
(00:30):
a brief intro. Alexander Vidman was Director of European Affairs
at the National Security Council and was appointed to his
post at the Trump White House in twenty eighteen and
was asked to stay for two years. His tasks included developing, coordinating,
executing plans and policies to manage the full range of diplomatic, informational, military,
(00:53):
and economic national security for the countries and his portfolio,
which included the Ukraine and Russia. Vinman had listened to
the July twenty fifth, twenty nineteen call between Trump and Zelensky.
He testified in October that he raised concerns twice that
Trump and his European Union Ambassador Gordon Sandland pushed Ukraine
(01:15):
leaders to investigate presidential candidate Joe Biden and his son
Hunter Biden. He told the House investigators that he raised
his concerns after he listened with other aids to Trump's
July twenty fifth call and concluded it was improper quote
to demand that a foreign government investigate a US citizen
(01:36):
that is Alexander Vinman, and he is a national hero.
He's an American hero, and his life is fascinating. Please
relax and listen to Alexander Finman. It is so nice
(02:03):
to meet you. Can I call you, alex Please call
me alex.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
I insist.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
I think that you are an incredible human being. And
I was so moved by your courage and candor during
this whole entire incident and this whole administration, and the
courage that it took for you to do what you
did so on behalf of everyone I know. I just
(02:26):
want to say thank you, because it's it's you're a
remarkable guy. And I don't know if you get that enough.
I don't know if people stop you on the street
and tell you that. But if I saw you in
the street, I would hug you, probably with tears in
my eyes and say thank you so much.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
Thank you, that's very kind. First, let me say I'm
going to challenge you for the funniest person on the program.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
Okay, good?
Speaker 3 (02:51):
And if you say that, if you would, you know,
you speak to my wife, you might not think I'm as.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
Much of a hero.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
So I don't know that because I read her texts.
I read what she says, you know about you and
your family, and she's been so supportive and so right there.
You're such a team, you're united, you have a daughter
like I don't know. I admire that about you as well.
She and your daughter have have put up with so
(03:17):
much as a result of this.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
Right, they've been great, They have been great.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
I just wanted to get to your point about how
what kind of reception I tend to get. Occasionally I
get what I perceived to be like sideways glances like
no it's that Vinmin guy or is like that. But
in general, you know, just about every single interaction I've had,
people have come up to me and been.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Very supportive, which I'm grateful for.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
It is not the way you might see on social
media with a kind of incessant on ending attacks, which
happens you know quite often on social media that's easy,
there's a black button there. But in general, when I
see people, they've been very, very kind, and I feel
a wealth of support from the American public at large,
(04:04):
and I'm grateful for that. It just it speaks more
to the soul of the American people that, you know
that despite what they've been propagandized to believe, I still
people have been kind.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
Yes, And I think that's because more people believe in
you and and the truth and what you stand for
than believe in the right wing party that's been taken
over by Trump.
Speaker 3 (04:34):
Yeah, but there are too many of those folks. Of course,
as we both know, probably amounts to tens of millions
of psychopaths, cult followers that are increasingly being driven to violence.
It's a small minority, you know. Where a country of
three hundred and thirty million people, it might amount to
one percent of the population. Percent of the population, which
(04:58):
in how you get numbers, could mean what thirty million people.
That's huge, but as a percentage of our overall American population,
it's really not that much. I think, by and large,
we are a kind hearted lot.
Speaker 1 (05:11):
Yeah, you said when you were testifying, which was so
beautiful that your father was worried that you might be
killed and you said, no, this is America, and hear
right matters. Which is the title of your wonderful book.
And thank you for sending me a copy that you inscribed,
which I have kept in a place of honor in
my house. But your father, from your family has escaped
(05:36):
a lot of crises, rightft your family left Russia, and
then your family escaped the Nazis, and your mom died
when you were quite young, you were three years old,
and you moved to the United States, and life here
was not as easy as one might expect for you know,
(05:58):
little boys, did you find that or.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
I think large a lot of the a lot of
that was true.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
And I think it was in my family DNA to
overcome a hardship and be resilient. But I'll tell you that,
you know, we didn't know that. We didn't have a
lot when we were we were when we were little
boys that arrived to the United States, you know, at
four years old, yes, in hindsight, you know, finding a
(06:23):
usable mattress on the street and using that as a
bed because we were you know, we came here age refugees.
My dad had seven hundred and fifty dollars in his
bucket the old furniture for the six first six months
here before being able to acquire a sufficient amount of
English to pass a civil service examine and become a
civil servant uh in engineer for the New York City
(06:47):
Department of Environmental Environmental Protection.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
But we didn't know.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
We didn't have a lot, you know. We we were happy,
go lucky kids, you know, uh.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Doing fine.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
And I think in I guess to a certain extent,
what we grew up on is understanding that hard work
does pay off. By watching the example of our father,
who had to restart his life at the age of
forty seven.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
Worked really long hours.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
We are married my stepmother, they both worked really hard
to provide for us.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
And I think those are the kinds of.
Speaker 3 (07:24):
The kinds of skills we developed and patterns we looked
to model and emulate.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
What did your mom die of? If you don't mind
me asking.
Speaker 3 (07:35):
So we the best we can figure out is some
sort of lymph cancer, maybe you know, a lymphoma. But
the reason that we were probably even as where as
we are, as my dad, who understood what she was
suffering from read an article about the Asha Varan that
had come to the US for treatment for the same
(07:57):
kind of cancer and that had extended his life for
you know, more than half a decade or so, and
he was looking to One of the reasons he was
looking to come to the US is to seek that
kind of medical care and save.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
His wife's, our mother's life.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
Yeah, but you were too young to remember her really.
I'm sure in stories maybe that you remember her from
from family lore, but in your own memory, you don't
carry any memory of her really, right.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
We don't, But we make it a kind of a
pilgrimage when we whenever I'm in Ukraine, whenever my brothers
are in Ukraine and I'm there for work, trying to
be helpful with this war while I was in government
as a policymaker, I'd make it a point to take
a pilgrimage to her gravesite and.
Speaker 2 (08:45):
You know, make sure everything was in order.
Speaker 1 (08:46):
And you know, yeah, that's a hard one. My mom
died as well when I was ten, and there were
five children. But I do have memories, and my youngest
brother was just about five, and he doesn't really have
very many at all, you know, And I always wished
I could give him the few that I that I have,
but even at ten, I don't have a lot of memories.
(09:07):
I think the shock of it, you know, doesn't allow
you to store as many things when you're a young
kid like that.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
Yeah, I think for us it's a little bit more difficult.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
We're closer with our stepmother, she raised us from when
we were about seven years old, but we have a
very special relationship with our dad. He was a sole
caregiver for a long time. You know, again, quite an
amazing individual, a model for us, and you know, I
think the fact is that we're closer with him just
(09:42):
by by nature of that relationship. So it's a little
bit of discovery for me, kind of watching the interaction
between my daughter and my wife Rachel and how close
they really are. It's something I guess we didn't quite
get a chance to experience in the same kind of way.
I imagine you Rosie also had a similar kind of experience.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
Grown up, Yes, totally, And when my daughters started to
do the things that pre teenage girls start to do,
I was shocked because you know, I didn't have that
time period to push away from my mom and identify
myself as an individual person. You have to go through
this as a human. But when my kids did it,
I was bereft, you know, I thought, what are they
(10:22):
doing to me? Not realizing that because I hadn't seen
it happen as a kid. You know, we'll be right
back with Alexander Vinman after this. Do you think your
(10:52):
father provided you with the moral compass that allowed you
to become I'm going to say, a whistleblower, And though
you don't like that word, I read.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
So I think I think it's maybe more a little
bit more basic, and it's something I try to instill
my daughter. Also, he did not tolerate lies, so I
think those that would be dealt with kind of mercilessly.
He prided himself on, you know, kind of your word
is your bond and integrity, and it's something that I
(11:26):
think he instilled in us. So to me, you know what, reporting,
I think there was what I try to do with
the books. I try to kind of explain all of
the of the elements of my background that resulted in
me taking what some people, you know, believe is courageous.
For me, seemed like a kind of a basic and
most instinctual response.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
To So you didn't wrestle with yourself with the concept.
You heard it. You knew that it was unconstitutional and
immoral and criminal in many ways. So you said, did
he basically try to hold him up for money in
order to President Trump, in order to get bad information
(12:08):
on Biden, who he was terribly afraid of.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
It was, he was easy. I did not struggle struggle
with that at all. Frankly, it was the right thing
to do. I was doing it in the in the
right way and in the proper reporting channels. There are
are there's recourse. I was in a very lofty position
as a director for European Affairs.
Speaker 2 (12:27):
It's it's a serious position.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
You're convening the deputy assistants, UH secretaries across all the
departments today and she's it's the equivalent of an army
three star general, so way above my pay grade.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (12:40):
And I had a lot of responsibilities, and I wasn't
going to shirk my responsibilities, you know, for for the
purposes of preserving my own career. I you know, I
knew what the right thing to do was, and I
did there. I did this all in a in a
proper channel, and got the process going to result in impeachment.
What's maybe a little bit different than all the whistleblowers
(13:00):
is that oftentimes they're kind of really maybe helpless within
their institutions and have to go outside, let's say, to news,
to reporting or some other means to seek some sort of.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
A redress. In my case, I didn't have to do that.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
I was charged with running policy for Russia, Ukraine, parts
of Europe. And what I could do is instead I
could bring the entire community of professionals together and get
all that momentum forward to try to put us back
right on track, which is what I did when I
(13:40):
was in my position. At the same time, Congress became
aware of my report and they had their oversight responsibilities,
and you know, I guess to a certain extent, I
used the tools in my toolbox to try to continue
to try to do the right thing, regardless of external pressure.
Speaker 1 (13:57):
Did you speak to your twin brother before you did it,
because in some way did you realize that you were
risking his career in some ways? Or who would ever
think that the government would react in the way that
it did to both you and your brother and your family.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
Yeah, you know, to me, he was he was my
he we were in a very very unique situation. We
were both assigned to the National Security Council, commonly kind
of joking around referred to as the Vitmin twins, as
the twins on the NSE or something like that. And
I talked to him about, you know, just about everything
(14:33):
he had. He was he as an attorney and the
ethics official there had all of the right clearances. His
job was to provide legal counsel for kind of ethics
issues for me, you know, I mean, I didn't have
to guess about where he could be on this issue either.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
He's my twin brothers. We're very close sight.
Speaker 3 (14:54):
I know what his views are, so I didn't really
even have to deliberate that much.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
I think if I knew that he would be the.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Target of retaliation, it would be I'd be hard pressed
to bring him into to be the you know, kind
of retaliated against it. But at the same time, he
probably wouldn't let me get away with it, because if
if he knew I kept him I try to keep
him safe, he'd be very angry or something like that.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Right, didn't share the burden with him.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
How many people were on that phone call that you
were on that you felt morally obligated to report. How
many do you know?
Speaker 3 (15:26):
Yeah, so in the room there were were probably about
a half a dozen officials. It turned out that the
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had was also on the
conference line, on the party line, as well as Donald Trump,
maybe by himself or with a kind of a probably
(15:46):
with its chief of staff taking it from his residence.
So maybe you know, all total less than a dozen people.
Speaker 1 (15:52):
And you were the only one who reported it.
Speaker 3 (15:57):
I think that's true. It turns out out that maybe
my boss, who was a political appointee, may have also
once I informed him of the fact that I was
I reported. I think he did the same thing, but
mainly not to report wrongdoing, mainly mainly.
Speaker 2 (16:14):
As a cya to kind of.
Speaker 3 (16:17):
Exactly not that he was had any you know, moral
or ethical, uh concerns about it, just mainly mainly as
a as a as a coverer asked type of thing.
But yeah, I guess I was probably the only one
on that one. But that doesn't necessarily surprise me. You
had what you had on that phone called our political operatives,
folks that you owed their their careers to Donald Trump.
(16:39):
They were not going to go go up against them
or challenge him. And then you had some some professionals
coming out of departments and agencies, not many, maybe one
or two of those folks, but their their purview was
not like mine, not responsible for all the policy to
do with Ukraine or Russia. They had, let's say, you know,
somebody from the press team was there was to cover
(17:01):
that equity. They didn't under necessarily understand all the issues
or that Trump was putting the squeeze on, you know,
or they followed it was my responsibility to you because
I was charged with that office.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
He's a very you know, vindictive person, and not only
to you, but to many people. He was in business
with who for many years. You know, did you you
grew up in New York, right?
Speaker 2 (17:23):
I did?
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Yeah, yeah, Because if you grew up in New York,
I always tell everyone you were fully aware of who
he was as a person, because we always saw the
New York Post and everyone ridiculing him about what a
joke of a person he was. And so to New Yorkers,
I think it was a shock that he could become president,
that he could hold any position of authority, because we
(17:44):
all viewed him as like a bad used car salesman,
you know, selling stakes and vodka and ties.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
You know.
Speaker 3 (17:51):
I always say to people that you should be barred
from general election if you can't win your own constituency.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
I think that's true.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
I mean, those are the people that know you bust.
If you can't win in like New York City, New
York State, you have no business you know, running for office.
That would have been too bout our founding fathers that
thought of that in.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
The Yeah, that's a good that's a good thing to
put in there. I could tell you that because the
people of New York have no time for him.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
You know.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
Whatsoever? Can I ask you when you did that speech,
when you testified, how did you feel that night? Did
you feel like you were walking on air or did
you feel like, oh no, something's going to happen, Like
what was your state of mind after you were done?
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Sure?
Speaker 3 (18:32):
So, I mean I knew pretty much relatively quickly that
I was going to have issues with regards to retaliation,
you know, within within the first couple of days, I
knew that I was already out on the outs with
the White House. I still had my position. I could
still do good work, but in terms of the political leadership,
(18:55):
the folks above me, They start to marginalize me, pulled
me off of you know, various trips, engagements with presidents
of Linsky, Mike Pence, Donald Trump. So I knew that
I was as I was in hot water. I also
kind of got the sense they couldn't really get rid
of me until after things were shuttled out with the
(19:17):
regards to the impeachment and then the Senate trial. So
I just did the best I could for as long
as I could. And of course, as we all know,
just you know, two days after the end of this
the Senate trial, I was fired from the White House.
And what are you expecting that, Alex was I was
expecting that.
Speaker 2 (19:37):
I was expecting that it was.
Speaker 3 (19:38):
Going to happen the day after, actually, so I was
a little surprised that it took two days. But you know,
I knew I was going to be the subject of
retaliation and I was going to lose my kind of
longstop position in the White House where where I thought
I could do a lot of work, but I thought
I still had a military career. I did not realize that,
(19:58):
you know, basically, the attacks were going to scare off
the military leadership and you know, caused me to become
radioactive and marginalized there when I was when I was
in really good standing, and you know, I had a
really quite fast ascent within my within my career field
(20:18):
as a foreign area officer, a diplomat, I was selected
for promotion to colonel. I didn't think all those things
were going to come to to a crashing end. But
you know, I guess the question is do I have
any any regrets. I don't have any regrets about about
doing what I did. I think it was the right
thing to do. I think when I was faced with
(20:40):
the kind of a crisis moment and living.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
Up to my oath to support.
Speaker 3 (20:45):
And defend the Constitution against all on ma'se farm domestic,
I lived up to my obligations. And sometimes you, I mean,
this is life. This is not you know, TV or
a movie. You have to deal with the consequences. And
the consequences for me were the end of a military
career that I'd worked really hard for for decades.
Speaker 1 (21:02):
But yeah, twenty eight years, right, you were in the
military twenty two years. Twenty two years, Yeah, not that old,
but I am.
Speaker 3 (21:09):
Yeah, But you know, at the same time, you know,
there's there's something, like I said, there are certain aspects
that are in my family's DNA resilience.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
I didn't really when it came clear to.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
Me that I was not going to be able to
have the same career after Trump retaliation.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Did you hear from a lot of people after you
I know, people supported you on TikTok and Twitter, but
did people reach out and say, hey, I think that
you're amazing and congratulations.
Speaker 3 (21:40):
I did so within the military, which is frankly one
of the more important, you know, constituencies for me. I
felt a lot of support from from my peers, colonels
and below, but crickets from the seniors, you know, kind
of you know, the slightly more political echelon, which was
which is pretty frustrating. I was trying to saw us
out if I still had a military career, and all
(22:03):
the signals were no. So you know, that's one of
the reasons I moved on. But I've since got my
doctorate from JOHNS. Hopkins and I run a think tank
and write a lot about and speak a lot about,
you know, geopolitics, so pretty rewarding. But from the general public,
I did, I mean, like I said, in face to
(22:23):
face interactions is quite positive. My synagogue at one point
indicated that I was.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Open to receiving mail, and there were it was a flood.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
There were thousands of pieces of mail that I made
it a point to read every single one of them. Uh,
and some just wonderful stories were counting you know, immigrant backgrounds,
connections that people drew between their family that came you know,
in the time of the main Flower to present day,
as well as recent immigrants and you know, Holocaust survivors
(22:54):
and stuff like that. So it was it was I
guess I'm quite fortunate that I was able to draw
that kind of support. I think again, other whistle blowers
don't don't have that there there. They become priors within
their you know, within their work environments, maybe within their
communities and so forth, and don't get the benefit of
(23:17):
that kind of public support.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
And I did, Yeah, that's wonderful. How come you shun
the word whistle blower because I saw that in a
couple of interviews I read, I.
Speaker 3 (23:27):
Because I guess a couple of different things. The first
one is because I think whistle blowers sometimes have to
deal with even more challenging circumstances than I did. They
didn't have the ability to reach out and reach receive support.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
They have to deal with.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
The trauma of being a whistleblower, losing their job, losing
their livelihood, potentially family, and not being able to recover. Frankly,
I guess in part is do you feel like I
was able to recover, you know, knock down but got
back up, continue to do things that thought were important
(24:12):
to me. So I think that's one of the reasons
that I kind of I feel like it's maybe a
bit of a disservice to the term whistleblower.
Speaker 1 (24:21):
The other one is, well, well, your dad was worried
about you losing your life.
Speaker 3 (24:25):
I think that's true. I think from his context it
made huge sense. If I had done something like this
in Russia, they.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
Would have murdered me. You know, progosions plane.
Speaker 3 (24:36):
Was knocked down, and that's the way they deal with,
you know, people that are seen as opponents.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
But we live in a different society.
Speaker 3 (24:43):
We live in a society governed by the rule of law,
you know, by art Western democratic liberal values, even if
we fall short of them. Sometimes that's kind of still
in our DNA always trying to strive for that more
perfect union, so I didn't have to feel for fear
(25:03):
in the same way. I mean, yes, I was concerned
about losing a job and providing for my family, but
I also recognized that unlike my dad who came here
at forty seven, I was younger. I didn't have three
I had a daughter and a wife. I didn't have
three boys and no spouse like he did. I spoke English,
I had my Ivy League degrees. I mean, I could
(25:24):
land on you know, I could land on my feet.
So I guess from that standpoint again, you know, I
I think I was pretty darn I've done pretty well
in spite of these challenges, in spite of being taken off,
you know, the path I had set for myself.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
But it doesn't change. Actually, actually, one aspect of it
is that the.
Speaker 3 (25:49):
Trump regime has never really been held to account until
we're quite recently.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
Yes, for all of.
Speaker 3 (25:57):
Their various priming, I think that right now. The January
sixth insurrection was the culmination of the President's efforts to
try to steal the.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
Twenty twenty election. It started with my report.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
It started with with what I was reporting, which was
the President was trying to tip the scales in his
favor by extorting an investigation against then President Biden. As
President Biden to steal that election. It culminated in an insurrection.
He only now after many years because he'd been finally
(26:30):
held accountable for his criminal activities. Mark Meadows as chief
of staff directly responsible in retaliation against me finally being
held accountable. So in a lot of ways, frankly, I
feel validated, validated, and vindicated. And when these folks are
wearing there aren't jumpsuits and paying for their crimes, I
(26:52):
think that this episode will be, you know, kind of
closed for me.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Yeah, you know, it's interesting. Since the first indictments were
handed down, I have felt a relief and a renewed
faith in the United States. I was really very disappointed
in the way and the pace and the timing of
him finally being called into account for what he did.
(27:17):
Do you think that the phone call that you reported
on the Zelenski trying to extort him gave putin the
idea that it was okay to go and take over Ukraine.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
I think the entire episode with the Ukraine scandal set
the conditions and did plant the seed for Putin to
believe that he could get away with it under Trump
or under a American political establishment in which Trump had
(27:50):
huge sway over the entirety of the Republican establishment. I
think the way, I you know, the clarity here is
that for Putin, the conclusion was that US national security
could be sacrificed to the political aims of an individual
Trump trying to steal an election was more important. His
own political success was more important than the US national security.
(28:14):
And then continuing on through the way Trump made Ukraine
radioactive to the US establishment, it became dangerous for high
level engagement between Ukraine and US policy makers, so that
undercut US support for Ukraine, made Ukraine look more vulnerable,
It undercut the kind of aid Ukraine could get, including
(28:37):
through a military aid, and ultimately it actually carried through,
frankly into at the beginning of the Biden administration. President
Biden didn't meet with Zelensky until the summer of twenty
twenty one, and that could have been time well spent
hardening Ukraine, sending the message that Ukraine was off limits.
(29:00):
What probably ultimately, you know, one of the tipping points
for Putin must have been even as hundreds of thousands
of troops, almost two hundred thousand troops were being placed
on Ukraine's borders.
Speaker 2 (29:14):
You still had Donald Trump cheerleading for Putin, right.
Speaker 1 (29:18):
It's unbelievable. It's unbelievable to think about, you know it is.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
But what the message for Putin is this, This is
potentially one of the front runners for twenty twenty four,
This is the guy that runs the Republican Party, and
that a war against Ukraine would come with little no consequences,
that the Republican establishment was not going.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
To hold Putin accountable for this war.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
That's the message that Trump and all his acolytes were
sending to Putin. That's why Putin felt so comfortable in
launching this war. That and you know, his misplaced chauvinism
about Russian power versus who the Ukrainians were. That's just
another historical feature of Russia and it's kind of imperialism
and domination of the region.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
But do you happen to know the death toll in
the Ukraine for Ukraine citizens and since its.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
Started, it's so there.
Speaker 3 (30:13):
The official numbers are frankly in the low tens of thousands.
Sounds like, you know, that is an absurd number, but
it's that's the official death till. The estimates are significantly
higher for places that the Russians are occupying, like Mariopol alone.
Expectations are that there were tens of thousands of people
(30:35):
killed there in Russia's attack on the city and population.
The toll for the Ukrainian military maybe you know, as
high as seventy eighty maybe one hundred thousand, which is
a catastrophic number. We're talking about a country with a
pre war population of about forty three million, and one
hundred thousand of their best and brightest have been killed
(30:58):
fighting to defend the country. Is not you know, the
Russians have been throwing their ash and trash, a lot
of their ash trash there prisoners, tens of thousands of
prisoners that were dragged into their ranks to fight against Ukraine.
But for Ukraine, it's a cross cutting of society. Artists, actors, musicians,
(31:20):
scientists have all signed up to do their patrioch duty
and defend their country, deferend their homes, defend their families,
and you know, they've taken punishing losses and it kind
of makes you sick if you think about, you.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
Know what this means for the future.
Speaker 3 (31:37):
Of society, and this war is not likely to end
anytime soon. Unfortunately. I think it's likely to last through.
There's a small chance that we'll get into some negotiations
towards the end of this year, but it's likely it
last twenty twenty four, in part because of the fact
that Putin.
Speaker 1 (31:54):
They want to see if Trump wins, right, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (31:56):
Putin may think that he could snatch victory from the
jaws of defeat in a favorable US election.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
We'll be right back with Alexander Vinman after this, m.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
M M.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
Many people have said that Trump is a Russian asset,
but I think he's too dumb to be that. But
he might be one, unknowingly, like just because he's not
very intelligent and he doesn't understand, uh, kind of the
inner workings of politics.
Speaker 3 (32:47):
He's easily manipulated. He is what's called called a unwitting
asset and a useful idiot. That's the that's the you know,
these are these are actually the technical terms that I uh,
let's say, you know, counterintelligence or intelligence would use to
describe him if they were going to assess him. The
reason is that he's probably not aware of the fact
that he's being run as an asset, that Putin was
(33:10):
pandering to him, pandering to his narcissism and his vanity.
And when Putin would you know, talk him up, saying
good job, Donald, keep it up, keep up the good work,
and knowing that Trump is a fanboys over Putin, was
the easy way to manipulate him. And the fact that
you know it, really it became quite apparent on my
(33:33):
first day and on the National Security Council when Trump
was having his press conference with Putin and Helsinki that
he was easily manipulated. Trump was easily manipulated into buying
Putin's lies over the assessment of the intelligence community.
Speaker 1 (33:49):
So it reminded me of a kid from the av
squad in high school finally getting the attention of the
quarterback and he felt all puffed up. And you know
by this horrible dictator, murderer, you know that this is
the person he admires. It should have been enough of
a warning sign for us, our our biggest international adversary
(34:11):
for how many decades? And that's who he Cozi's up to. Yeah,
I mean, I don't you.
Speaker 3 (34:15):
Know, the term of art is useful, idiot, But Frankly,
I think Trump is a useless idiot just you know,
just doesn't fit the quite that way.
Speaker 1 (34:24):
How do you explain his appeal? Do you have any ida?
I mean, you went to Harvard, so I feel like
I can ask you anything about pilotic Do you think
do you think it had anything to do with the
celebrity Apprentice because it was a number one show for
so many years and I think Americans believed what they
saw even though it was all a lie.
Speaker 3 (34:43):
Sure, I think you know there's something that you said
about showmanship and that Trump presented himself as an effective
leader and outsider when politics have been demonized, you know,
politicians are not to be heralded and praised for their
(35:05):
sacrifice in public service, but they're there now to be
kind of reviled as dirty, self serving, you know, kind.
Speaker 2 (35:14):
Of corrupt and so forth. That's when when.
Speaker 3 (35:18):
We take our political discourse towards attacking one one candidate
attacking another as corrupt. Uh, that's going to have a
toll on the general public. So the idea that this
guy was going to come in and drain the swamp
because he's an outsider that you know, government is too bloated,
(35:40):
like the Republicans have been saying it's ineffective that that
you know, we have we have a big government, our
tax dollars are being wasted. When when politicians say that
long enough, it's it's a propaganda threat that really starts
to kind of uh pervade the way people the way
people think about politics. And this guy was going to
come in to be an effective leader. Now nobody in
(36:03):
New York was going to buy that, because they knew
exactly was We'd been brought up recognizing that he's a
failure of fraud, you know, numerous bankruptcies and you know, infidelity.
Speaker 2 (36:16):
All sorts of other stuff.
Speaker 3 (36:17):
But the American public wasn't aware of that, and they
were effectively propagandized and convinced to believe it. And I
think that's part of it, But there was another part
of it, unfortunately, maybe more kind of insipid and dangerous.
He was willing to settle scores with the folks that
people felt they've been slighted by themselves, by diversity, by
(36:41):
you know, minorities that were taking their jobs, by all
of these things that you know are For whatever reason,
American public felt like they needed to settle a score
with and Trump was going to roll things back. He's
going to be regressive to give these folks their power.
So I think that that's a that is the more
(37:03):
dangerous component of this is that it kind of feeds
a base notion that you know, the reason that your
lot in life is so difficult is because somebody has
taken something that rightfully belonged to you, and Trump was
going to roll that back.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
What do you think will happen if he is found guilty?
Will he ever serve time?
Speaker 3 (37:22):
I think I think the fact is that I'm increasingly confident.
I think these there are four different indictments now having
different strength. I'd say that the first couple of indictments
uh probably weren't weren't the weighty ones and weren't going
to be sufficient to put him in irons. But his
(37:43):
indictment for uh mishandling classified information is very dangerous. These
are highly classified documents that he he stole, and potentially,
while the assessment is being done, it is hard to
fathom that other foreign intelligence networks that we're not aware
(38:07):
of the fact that he had all these classified documents,
were not looking to gain access to these documents.
Speaker 2 (38:12):
So he potentially.
Speaker 3 (38:13):
Compromised operations, compromised, Are you know, our intelligence at.
Speaker 1 (38:22):
On the ground for all those all those people who
were murdered, you know, is he responsible for that? You know?
I mean, so.
Speaker 3 (38:30):
That's that's that's what's being analyzed right now. So I
think that is a grave crime, and I think he's
likely to serve time for that. And then the insurrection itself,
I think we're going to learn a lot more. I mean,
I think those of us that have been paying attention
understood how central Trump was to the whole insurrection and
the violence against the Capitol.
Speaker 1 (38:51):
But he was completely the orchestrator of that, exactly right.
Speaker 3 (38:55):
And you know, again, to me, this is apparent because
I saw firsthand in two thousand eighteen with the squeeze
on Lensky.
Speaker 2 (39:02):
The rest of the public.
Speaker 3 (39:03):
Really learned about it only after he attempted to claim
the fact that he the election was stolen from of course,
that's because he failed to steal it himself.
Speaker 2 (39:13):
So he's doing a lot of nerdyritionging exactly So.
Speaker 3 (39:15):
I think he's he's likely to serve time, actually, and
so are his enablers, which is critically important. It's not
just the king pen but then enablers, because the messages
needs to be sent to other folks that you know,
if they support a criminal enterprise, they're going to pay
the price. So I'm looking forward to the day that,
you know, justice has served against Giuliani and Mark Meadows
(39:36):
and all these other enablers, all.
Speaker 1 (39:38):
Of the people on their roster got time. And I
just wonder, you know, what, where would we be able
to put him, to keep him quote unquote safe in
that environment. Where how would we be able to do that?
But partially, you know, whether or not he ends up
in jail to me, can't be the victory, although I
know he should. The fact that there are all of
these indictments and that were people like you, like who
(40:02):
at the courage to stand up for what's right. You know,
all of these DA's and all of these people who
refuse to bow to him, you know, they all deserve
to be put on a pedestal like I believe you do,
because you are what it means to be an American
in my mind.
Speaker 2 (40:20):
You know, it's.
Speaker 3 (40:20):
Interesting when I was testifying, I'm, for some reason, kind
of one of the more notable figures. But there were
lots of my colleagues that were up there with me,
and for me, one of the silver linings from the
whole episode was thought that the American public could see
behind the curtain about the excellence of public service and
(40:42):
excellent public service that their tax dollars were going towards.
So you know, we're seeing that the same kind of
we're seeing that play out with the district attorneys, with
the other law enforcement officers the courts that are again
public servants doing the right thing, and that is not
(41:04):
something that's you know, kind of displayed on a regular
basis there. Instead, it's the narratives around that public servants
are a waste of resources, a waste of dollars, and
stuff like that. So I continue to try to take
every opportunity to elevate public service because it made me
in part of who I am. And yes, there are
countless thousands of public servants out there that are doing
(41:25):
their best to defend US national security, hold the line,
make sure that this country is governed by the role
of law.
Speaker 1 (41:33):
So important. I mean, do you think that there will
be another politician with his kind of cult like status.
Do you think, like I look at DeSantis and I
think he doesn't have that thing whatever that thing is
whether that was you know, many years on a reality
show that portrayed him as someone he is not, or
whether it was some in a twisted charisma. I mean,
(41:57):
I don't know, but I don't see another one like
him coming to power.
Speaker 3 (42:02):
I think I think that is a hopeful perspective, and
I hope you're right. I think there are going to
be people that try to emulate it. I think, for instance,
RFK Junior is attempting to kind of juice the same
system on the left, although frankly he's you know, I
don't see what what that policies of his aligned with
kind of progressive.
Speaker 1 (42:23):
No, or his experience. He doesn't have any experience in
terms of politics.
Speaker 3 (42:28):
You know, sim kind of cult leadership though that he's
trying to trying to tap.
Speaker 1 (42:32):
Yeah, he I think liberals and Democrats are not taking
a shine to him. I think even his own family,
the Kennedy family, has said no, we do not support him.
So I don't even take him seriously, to tell you
the truth.
Speaker 2 (42:45):
I think that's right.
Speaker 3 (42:46):
I think people will attempt to emulate some of his
some of Trump's success in terms of you know, just
this unbelievably ironclad support from segments of society. But after
twenty twenty four, after his defeat in the next general election,
(43:06):
hopefully by larger margin, it's going to be close no
matter what. We're probably talking about two three four percent.
That's way too close for comfort between.
Speaker 1 (43:14):
The Tsards to believe. You know, Alex, when you see
those newscasters who go into the Trump rallies and the
people are covered in their Trump swag and they say
the most absurd things like Joe Biden is dead and
that's actor James Woods, I'm like, these people are serious.
(43:34):
They're seriously saying this to a newscaster. I don't understand
the state of delusion, mass delusion. It's like, we need
people to get them out of the cult, and how
do we do that. I think it starts with these trials.
I think it starts with him being found guilty. I
think it starts with people seeing I think it's happening.
(43:55):
Do you think it's happening.
Speaker 2 (43:56):
I think it's happening.
Speaker 3 (43:58):
I think that plus the loss pretty significant loss in
twenty twenty four, nobody really you know, we like our underdogs,
but we probably don't like our people to lose repeatedly,
So I think that's going to take a lot of
the lustyre off, but the trials themselves are going to
be critically important to pull back the curtain on you know,
(44:19):
everything he's done to harm.
Speaker 1 (44:20):
This country, and God knows, there's a lot of things. Yeah,
how's your brother doing. I'm curious about him? What you do?
You took off and got yourself a doctorate and are
working and is your brother as well as he did
he transition into something else he did.
Speaker 3 (44:37):
He left service in August, so he's been out for
just about a year. In that time, he's been working
with the Department of State to hold the Russians accountable.
Speaker 2 (44:48):
For war crimes in Ukraine. He's to Ukraine thirteen times.
Speaker 3 (44:52):
He's heading actually to Ukraine and next several days for
his thirteenth trip. Within a year, he and I worked
together on a bunch of different projects. We have humanitarian
efforts to help equip the Ukrainian National Guard, to direct resources.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
I mean, I've.
Speaker 3 (45:10):
Established, you know, nonprofit to try to help Ukraine, all
sorts of different ideas to try to We're working on
d mining, We're working on veterans care for the Ukrainian
Armed Services. Lots of folks that need to be integrated,
both with heavy wounds and you know, with just psychological
(45:31):
scars back into study, all sorts of different projects that
try to be helpful.
Speaker 1 (45:35):
Yeah, you served as well. I don't know if people
remember that that you served in Iraq, I believe right, Yeah,
how long were you there? How long?
Speaker 2 (45:44):
So I was there for a year.
Speaker 3 (45:47):
Eugene retired as his last position was as a colonel
and a judge advocate general. So like an attorney in
the military, we both served. We spent our careers in
the military. I serve on the border between North and
South Korea, in Ukraine and Russia for three years, all
(46:08):
sorts of different postings around the world.
Speaker 1 (46:11):
So lots of more thank you for your service, needless
to say, you're one there fighting the war. Was you know,
unbelievably courageous and brave and enlisting and serving the country
that way. But you know, your courage and standing up
to this horrific administration and all of the damage it
has done will leave you a hero in the history
(46:32):
books and admired and adored by people all over this
country who believe what you believe. That you know here
you know right matters.
Speaker 2 (46:43):
Well, thank you very much. I appreciate that. Do I
recall that you have connections also to some military service.
Speaker 1 (46:50):
Yes, my son is was a marine for four years,
and yeah, he hurt his back and that was kind
of a bummer for him because he wanted to have
a career in the military. And sure, you know, as
a mom, that was a very hard thing. You know,
I don't know what your stepmom felt. I'm sure your
dad was supportive, but for moms, I don't know. It
(47:11):
was a maybe dad's too. It was a terrifying concept
when he said to me, you know, his left wing,
liberal democratic mother, anti war, you know, I'm going to
go join I was like, dear God, anything but this.
But I'm so proud of him, and I'm proud of
everyone who chooses to do that and defend this country.
Although I do wish we could abolish war in some
way and settle our differences, like saying adults not like
(47:34):
you know, people from two hundred years ago. Sure listen.
My love to your wife, Rachel, your daughter, and your
whole family. I want to thank you for doing this.
I've wanted to speak to you for a very long time,
and my admiration is unending.
Speaker 3 (47:50):
Thank you very much. I'm glad we get finally connected. Surprise,
it took us this long, but looking forward to speaking
to you.
Speaker 1 (47:55):
Against Hen I know exactly. We had some Twitter interaction
there a little bit, but yeah, definitely, But thank you
for doing this, and I hope to hear from you
if the troll win the trial ends, I would love
to do this again so that we could uh take
a gander it at where we ended up.
Speaker 2 (48:12):
Sounds good.
Speaker 1 (48:12):
Thank you all right, Alex, thank you so much. I
hope you enjoyed that. You know, we tend to run
a little along with these kinds of conversations, so we
don't have time for questions today. Next week the one
and only Kathy Griffin. Don't miss it. We drop on
Tuesdays onward with Rosie o'donald
Well, hey, everybody, you have found me and welcome to
Onward with Rosie o'donald. I don't like to talk about
myself in the third person like that. Isn't that weird,
Rosie o'donald. It's me. I can't just say onward with me?
Could I? Okay? It's onward with me. Today we have
an amazing guest, Alexander Vidman. And who is Alexander Vindman?
Most of you know, but I'm going to give you
(00:30):
a brief intro. Alexander Vidman was Director of European Affairs
at the National Security Council and was appointed to his
post at the Trump White House in twenty eighteen and
was asked to stay for two years. His tasks included developing, coordinating,
executing plans and policies to manage the full range of diplomatic, informational, military,
(00:53):
and economic national security for the countries and his portfolio,
which included the Ukraine and Russia. Vinman had listened to
the July twenty fifth, twenty nineteen call between Trump and Zelensky.
He testified in October that he raised concerns twice that
Trump and his European Union Ambassador Gordon Sandland pushed Ukraine
(01:15):
leaders to investigate presidential candidate Joe Biden and his son
Hunter Biden. He told the House investigators that he raised
his concerns after he listened with other aids to Trump's
July twenty fifth call and concluded it was improper quote
to demand that a foreign government investigate a US citizen
(01:36):
that is Alexander Vinman, and he is a national hero.
He's an American hero, and his life is fascinating. Please
relax and listen to Alexander Finman. It is so nice
(02:03):
to meet you. Can I call you, alex Please call
me alex.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
I insist.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
I think that you are an incredible human being. And
I was so moved by your courage and candor during
this whole entire incident and this whole administration, and the
courage that it took for you to do what you
did so on behalf of everyone I know. I just
(02:26):
want to say thank you, because it's it's you're a
remarkable guy. And I don't know if you get that enough.
I don't know if people stop you on the street
and tell you that. But if I saw you in
the street, I would hug you, probably with tears in
my eyes and say thank you so much.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
Thank you, that's very kind. First, let me say I'm
going to challenge you for the funniest person on the program.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
Okay, good?
Speaker 3 (02:51):
And if you say that, if you would, you know,
you speak to my wife, you might not think I'm as.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
Much of a hero.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
So I don't know that because I read her texts.
I read what she says, you know about you and
your family, and she's been so supportive and so right there.
You're such a team, you're united, you have a daughter
like I don't know. I admire that about you as well.
She and your daughter have have put up with so
(03:17):
much as a result of this.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
Right, they've been great, They have been great.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
I just wanted to get to your point about how
what kind of reception I tend to get. Occasionally I
get what I perceived to be like sideways glances like
no it's that Vinmin guy or is like that. But
in general, you know, just about every single interaction I've had,
people have come up to me and been.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Very supportive, which I'm grateful for.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
It is not the way you might see on social
media with a kind of incessant on ending attacks, which
happens you know quite often on social media that's easy,
there's a black button there. But in general, when I
see people, they've been very, very kind, and I feel
a wealth of support from the American public at large,
(04:04):
and I'm grateful for that. It just it speaks more
to the soul of the American people that, you know
that despite what they've been propagandized to believe, I still
people have been kind.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
Yes, And I think that's because more people believe in
you and and the truth and what you stand for
than believe in the right wing party that's been taken
over by Trump.
Speaker 3 (04:34):
Yeah, but there are too many of those folks. Of course,
as we both know, probably amounts to tens of millions
of psychopaths, cult followers that are increasingly being driven to violence.
It's a small minority, you know. Where a country of
three hundred and thirty million people, it might amount to
one percent of the population. Percent of the population, which
(04:58):
in how you get numbers, could mean what thirty million people.
That's huge, but as a percentage of our overall American population,
it's really not that much. I think, by and large,
we are a kind hearted lot.
Speaker 1 (05:11):
Yeah, you said when you were testifying, which was so
beautiful that your father was worried that you might be
killed and you said, no, this is America, and hear
right matters. Which is the title of your wonderful book.
And thank you for sending me a copy that you inscribed,
which I have kept in a place of honor in
my house. But your father, from your family has escaped
(05:36):
a lot of crises, rightft your family left Russia, and
then your family escaped the Nazis, and your mom died
when you were quite young, you were three years old,
and you moved to the United States, and life here
was not as easy as one might expect for you know,
(05:58):
little boys, did you find that or.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
I think large a lot of the a lot of
that was true.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
And I think it was in my family DNA to
overcome a hardship and be resilient. But I'll tell you that,
you know, we didn't know that. We didn't have a
lot when we were we were when we were little
boys that arrived to the United States, you know, at
four years old, yes, in hindsight, you know, finding a
(06:23):
usable mattress on the street and using that as a
bed because we were you know, we came here age refugees.
My dad had seven hundred and fifty dollars in his
bucket the old furniture for the six first six months
here before being able to acquire a sufficient amount of
English to pass a civil service examine and become a
civil servant uh in engineer for the New York City
(06:47):
Department of Environmental Environmental Protection.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
But we didn't know.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
We didn't have a lot, you know. We we were happy,
go lucky kids, you know, uh.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Doing fine.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
And I think in I guess to a certain extent,
what we grew up on is understanding that hard work
does pay off. By watching the example of our father,
who had to restart his life at the age of
forty seven.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
Worked really long hours.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
We are married my stepmother, they both worked really hard
to provide for us.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
And I think those are the kinds of.
Speaker 3 (07:24):
The kinds of skills we developed and patterns we looked
to model and emulate.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
What did your mom die of? If you don't mind
me asking.
Speaker 3 (07:35):
So we the best we can figure out is some
sort of lymph cancer, maybe you know, a lymphoma. But
the reason that we were probably even as where as
we are, as my dad, who understood what she was
suffering from read an article about the Asha Varan that
had come to the US for treatment for the same
(07:57):
kind of cancer and that had extended his life for
you know, more than half a decade or so, and
he was looking to One of the reasons he was
looking to come to the US is to seek that
kind of medical care and save.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
His wife's, our mother's life.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
Yeah, but you were too young to remember her really.
I'm sure in stories maybe that you remember her from
from family lore, but in your own memory, you don't
carry any memory of her really, right.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
We don't, But we make it a kind of a
pilgrimage when we whenever I'm in Ukraine, whenever my brothers
are in Ukraine and I'm there for work, trying to
be helpful with this war while I was in government
as a policymaker, I'd make it a point to take
a pilgrimage to her gravesite and.
Speaker 2 (08:45):
You know, make sure everything was in order.
Speaker 1 (08:46):
And you know, yeah, that's a hard one. My mom
died as well when I was ten, and there were
five children. But I do have memories, and my youngest
brother was just about five, and he doesn't really have
very many at all, you know, And I always wished
I could give him the few that I that I have,
but even at ten, I don't have a lot of memories.
(09:07):
I think the shock of it, you know, doesn't allow
you to store as many things when you're a young
kid like that.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
Yeah, I think for us it's a little bit more difficult.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
We're closer with our stepmother, she raised us from when
we were about seven years old, but we have a
very special relationship with our dad. He was a sole
caregiver for a long time. You know, again, quite an
amazing individual, a model for us, and you know, I
think the fact is that we're closer with him just
(09:42):
by by nature of that relationship. So it's a little
bit of discovery for me, kind of watching the interaction
between my daughter and my wife Rachel and how close
they really are. It's something I guess we didn't quite
get a chance to experience in the same kind of way.
I imagine you Rosie also had a similar kind of experience.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
Grown up, Yes, totally, And when my daughters started to
do the things that pre teenage girls start to do,
I was shocked because you know, I didn't have that
time period to push away from my mom and identify
myself as an individual person. You have to go through
this as a human. But when my kids did it,
I was bereft, you know, I thought, what are they
(10:22):
doing to me? Not realizing that because I hadn't seen
it happen as a kid. You know, we'll be right
back with Alexander Vinman after this. Do you think your
(10:52):
father provided you with the moral compass that allowed you
to become I'm going to say, a whistleblower, And though
you don't like that word, I read.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
So I think I think it's maybe more a little
bit more basic, and it's something I try to instill
my daughter. Also, he did not tolerate lies, so I
think those that would be dealt with kind of mercilessly.
He prided himself on, you know, kind of your word
is your bond and integrity, and it's something that I
(11:26):
think he instilled in us. So to me, you know what, reporting,
I think there was what I try to do with
the books. I try to kind of explain all of
the of the elements of my background that resulted in
me taking what some people, you know, believe is courageous.
For me, seemed like a kind of a basic and
most instinctual response.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
To So you didn't wrestle with yourself with the concept.
You heard it. You knew that it was unconstitutional and
immoral and criminal in many ways. So you said, did
he basically try to hold him up for money in
order to President Trump, in order to get bad information
(12:08):
on Biden, who he was terribly afraid of.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
It was, he was easy. I did not struggle struggle
with that at all. Frankly, it was the right thing
to do. I was doing it in the in the
right way and in the proper reporting channels. There are
are there's recourse. I was in a very lofty position
as a director for European Affairs.
Speaker 2 (12:27):
It's it's a serious position.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
You're convening the deputy assistants, UH secretaries across all the
departments today and she's it's the equivalent of an army
three star general, so way above my pay grade.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (12:40):
And I had a lot of responsibilities, and I wasn't
going to shirk my responsibilities, you know, for for the
purposes of preserving my own career. I you know, I
knew what the right thing to do was, and I
did there. I did this all in a in a
proper channel, and got the process going to result in impeachment.
What's maybe a little bit different than all the whistleblowers
(13:00):
is that oftentimes they're kind of really maybe helpless within
their institutions and have to go outside, let's say, to news,
to reporting or some other means to seek some sort of.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
A redress. In my case, I didn't have to do that.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
I was charged with running policy for Russia, Ukraine, parts
of Europe. And what I could do is instead I
could bring the entire community of professionals together and get
all that momentum forward to try to put us back
right on track, which is what I did when I
(13:40):
was in my position. At the same time, Congress became
aware of my report and they had their oversight responsibilities,
and you know, I guess to a certain extent, I
used the tools in my toolbox to try to continue
to try to do the right thing, regardless of external pressure.
Speaker 1 (13:57):
Did you speak to your twin brother before you did it,
because in some way did you realize that you were
risking his career in some ways? Or who would ever
think that the government would react in the way that
it did to both you and your brother and your family.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
Yeah, you know, to me, he was he was my
he we were in a very very unique situation. We
were both assigned to the National Security Council, commonly kind
of joking around referred to as the Vitmin twins, as
the twins on the NSE or something like that. And
I talked to him about, you know, just about everything
(14:33):
he had. He was he as an attorney and the
ethics official there had all of the right clearances. His
job was to provide legal counsel for kind of ethics
issues for me, you know, I mean, I didn't have
to guess about where he could be on this issue either.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
He's my twin brothers. We're very close sight.
Speaker 3 (14:54):
I know what his views are, so I didn't really
even have to deliberate that much.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
I think if I knew that he would be the.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Target of retaliation, it would be I'd be hard pressed
to bring him into to be the you know, kind
of retaliated against it. But at the same time, he
probably wouldn't let me get away with it, because if
if he knew I kept him I try to keep
him safe, he'd be very angry or something like that.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Right, didn't share the burden with him.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
How many people were on that phone call that you
were on that you felt morally obligated to report. How
many do you know?
Speaker 3 (15:26):
Yeah, so in the room there were were probably about
a half a dozen officials. It turned out that the
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had was also on the
conference line, on the party line, as well as Donald Trump,
maybe by himself or with a kind of a probably
(15:46):
with its chief of staff taking it from his residence.
So maybe you know, all total less than a dozen people.
Speaker 1 (15:52):
And you were the only one who reported it.
Speaker 3 (15:57):
I think that's true. It turns out out that maybe
my boss, who was a political appointee, may have also
once I informed him of the fact that I was
I reported. I think he did the same thing, but
mainly not to report wrongdoing, mainly mainly.
Speaker 2 (16:14):
As a cya to kind of.
Speaker 3 (16:17):
Exactly not that he was had any you know, moral
or ethical, uh concerns about it, just mainly mainly as
a as a as a coverer asked type of thing.
But yeah, I guess I was probably the only one
on that one. But that doesn't necessarily surprise me. You
had what you had on that phone called our political operatives,
folks that you owed their their careers to Donald Trump.
(16:39):
They were not going to go go up against them
or challenge him. And then you had some some professionals
coming out of departments and agencies, not many, maybe one
or two of those folks, but their their purview was
not like mine, not responsible for all the policy to
do with Ukraine or Russia. They had, let's say, you know,
somebody from the press team was there was to cover
(17:01):
that equity. They didn't under necessarily understand all the issues
or that Trump was putting the squeeze on, you know,
or they followed it was my responsibility to you because
I was charged with that office.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
He's a very you know, vindictive person, and not only
to you, but to many people. He was in business
with who for many years. You know, did you you
grew up in New York, right?
Speaker 2 (17:23):
I did?
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Yeah, yeah, Because if you grew up in New York,
I always tell everyone you were fully aware of who
he was as a person, because we always saw the
New York Post and everyone ridiculing him about what a
joke of a person he was. And so to New Yorkers,
I think it was a shock that he could become president,
that he could hold any position of authority, because we
(17:44):
all viewed him as like a bad used car salesman,
you know, selling stakes and vodka and ties.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
You know.
Speaker 3 (17:51):
I always say to people that you should be barred
from general election if you can't win your own constituency.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
I think that's true.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
I mean, those are the people that know you bust.
If you can't win in like New York City, New
York State, you have no business you know, running for office.
That would have been too bout our founding fathers that
thought of that in.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
The Yeah, that's a good that's a good thing to
put in there. I could tell you that because the
people of New York have no time for him.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
You know.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
Whatsoever? Can I ask you when you did that speech,
when you testified, how did you feel that night? Did
you feel like you were walking on air or did
you feel like, oh no, something's going to happen, Like
what was your state of mind after you were done?
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Sure?
Speaker 3 (18:32):
So, I mean I knew pretty much relatively quickly that
I was going to have issues with regards to retaliation,
you know, within within the first couple of days, I
knew that I was already out on the outs with
the White House. I still had my position. I could
still do good work, but in terms of the political leadership,
(18:55):
the folks above me, They start to marginalize me, pulled
me off of you know, various trips, engagements with presidents
of Linsky, Mike Pence, Donald Trump. So I knew that
I was as I was in hot water. I also
kind of got the sense they couldn't really get rid
of me until after things were shuttled out with the
(19:17):
regards to the impeachment and then the Senate trial. So
I just did the best I could for as long
as I could. And of course, as we all know,
just you know, two days after the end of this
the Senate trial, I was fired from the White House.
And what are you expecting that, Alex was I was
expecting that.
Speaker 2 (19:37):
I was expecting that it was.
Speaker 3 (19:38):
Going to happen the day after, actually, so I was
a little surprised that it took two days. But you know,
I knew I was going to be the subject of
retaliation and I was going to lose my kind of
longstop position in the White House where where I thought
I could do a lot of work, but I thought
I still had a military career. I did not realize that,
(19:58):
you know, basically, the attacks were going to scare off
the military leadership and you know, caused me to become
radioactive and marginalized there when I was when I was
in really good standing, and you know, I had a
really quite fast ascent within my within my career field
(20:18):
as a foreign area officer, a diplomat, I was selected
for promotion to colonel. I didn't think all those things
were going to come to to a crashing end. But
you know, I guess the question is do I have
any any regrets. I don't have any regrets about about
doing what I did. I think it was the right
thing to do. I think when I was faced with
(20:40):
the kind of a crisis moment and living.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
Up to my oath to support.
Speaker 3 (20:45):
And defend the Constitution against all on ma'se farm domestic,
I lived up to my obligations. And sometimes you, I mean,
this is life. This is not you know, TV or
a movie. You have to deal with the consequences. And
the consequences for me were the end of a military
career that I'd worked really hard for for decades.
Speaker 1 (21:02):
But yeah, twenty eight years, right, you were in the
military twenty two years. Twenty two years, Yeah, not that old,
but I am.
Speaker 3 (21:09):
Yeah, But you know, at the same time, you know,
there's there's something, like I said, there are certain aspects
that are in my family's DNA resilience.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
I didn't really when it came clear to.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
Me that I was not going to be able to
have the same career after Trump retaliation.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Did you hear from a lot of people after you
I know, people supported you on TikTok and Twitter, but
did people reach out and say, hey, I think that
you're amazing and congratulations.
Speaker 3 (21:40):
I did so within the military, which is frankly one
of the more important, you know, constituencies for me. I
felt a lot of support from from my peers, colonels
and below, but crickets from the seniors, you know, kind
of you know, the slightly more political echelon, which was
which is pretty frustrating. I was trying to saw us
out if I still had a military career, and all
(22:03):
the signals were no. So you know, that's one of
the reasons I moved on. But I've since got my
doctorate from JOHNS. Hopkins and I run a think tank
and write a lot about and speak a lot about,
you know, geopolitics, so pretty rewarding. But from the general public,
I did, I mean, like I said, in face to
(22:23):
face interactions is quite positive. My synagogue at one point
indicated that I was.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Open to receiving mail, and there were it was a flood.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
There were thousands of pieces of mail that I made
it a point to read every single one of them. Uh,
and some just wonderful stories were counting you know, immigrant backgrounds,
connections that people drew between their family that came you know,
in the time of the main Flower to present day,
as well as recent immigrants and you know, Holocaust survivors
(22:54):
and stuff like that. So it was it was I
guess I'm quite fortunate that I was able to draw
that kind of support. I think again, other whistle blowers
don't don't have that there there. They become priors within
their you know, within their work environments, maybe within their
communities and so forth, and don't get the benefit of
(23:17):
that kind of public support.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
And I did, Yeah, that's wonderful. How come you shun
the word whistle blower because I saw that in a
couple of interviews I read, I.
Speaker 3 (23:27):
Because I guess a couple of different things. The first
one is because I think whistle blowers sometimes have to
deal with even more challenging circumstances than I did. They
didn't have the ability to reach out and reach receive support.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
They have to deal with.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
The trauma of being a whistleblower, losing their job, losing
their livelihood, potentially family, and not being able to recover. Frankly,
I guess in part is do you feel like I
was able to recover, you know, knock down but got
back up, continue to do things that thought were important
(24:12):
to me. So I think that's one of the reasons
that I kind of I feel like it's maybe a
bit of a disservice to the term whistleblower.
Speaker 1 (24:21):
The other one is, well, well, your dad was worried
about you losing your life.
Speaker 3 (24:25):
I think that's true. I think from his context it
made huge sense. If I had done something like this
in Russia, they.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
Would have murdered me. You know, progosions plane.
Speaker 3 (24:36):
Was knocked down, and that's the way they deal with,
you know, people that are seen as opponents.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
But we live in a different society.
Speaker 3 (24:43):
We live in a society governed by the rule of law,
you know, by art Western democratic liberal values, even if
we fall short of them. Sometimes that's kind of still
in our DNA always trying to strive for that more
perfect union, so I didn't have to feel for fear
(25:03):
in the same way. I mean, yes, I was concerned
about losing a job and providing for my family, but
I also recognized that unlike my dad who came here
at forty seven, I was younger. I didn't have three
I had a daughter and a wife. I didn't have
three boys and no spouse like he did. I spoke English,
I had my Ivy League degrees. I mean, I could
(25:24):
land on you know, I could land on my feet.
So I guess from that standpoint again, you know, I
I think I was pretty darn I've done pretty well
in spite of these challenges, in spite of being taken off,
you know, the path I had set for myself.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
But it doesn't change. Actually, actually, one aspect of it
is that the.
Speaker 3 (25:49):
Trump regime has never really been held to account until
we're quite recently.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
Yes, for all of.
Speaker 3 (25:57):
Their various priming, I think that right now. The January
sixth insurrection was the culmination of the President's efforts to
try to steal the.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
Twenty twenty election. It started with my report.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
It started with with what I was reporting, which was
the President was trying to tip the scales in his
favor by extorting an investigation against then President Biden. As
President Biden to steal that election. It culminated in an insurrection.
He only now after many years because he'd been finally
(26:30):
held accountable for his criminal activities. Mark Meadows as chief
of staff directly responsible in retaliation against me finally being
held accountable. So in a lot of ways, frankly, I
feel validated, validated, and vindicated. And when these folks are
wearing there aren't jumpsuits and paying for their crimes, I
(26:52):
think that this episode will be, you know, kind of
closed for me.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Yeah, you know, it's interesting. Since the first indictments were
handed down, I have felt a relief and a renewed
faith in the United States. I was really very disappointed
in the way and the pace and the timing of
him finally being called into account for what he did.
(27:17):
Do you think that the phone call that you reported
on the Zelenski trying to extort him gave putin the
idea that it was okay to go and take over Ukraine.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
I think the entire episode with the Ukraine scandal set
the conditions and did plant the seed for Putin to
believe that he could get away with it under Trump
or under a American political establishment in which Trump had
(27:50):
huge sway over the entirety of the Republican establishment. I
think the way, I you know, the clarity here is
that for Putin, the conclusion was that US national security
could be sacrificed to the political aims of an individual
Trump trying to steal an election was more important. His
own political success was more important than the US national security.
(28:14):
And then continuing on through the way Trump made Ukraine
radioactive to the US establishment, it became dangerous for high
level engagement between Ukraine and US policy makers, so that
undercut US support for Ukraine, made Ukraine look more vulnerable,
It undercut the kind of aid Ukraine could get, including
(28:37):
through a military aid, and ultimately it actually carried through,
frankly into at the beginning of the Biden administration. President
Biden didn't meet with Zelensky until the summer of twenty
twenty one, and that could have been time well spent
hardening Ukraine, sending the message that Ukraine was off limits.
(29:00):
What probably ultimately, you know, one of the tipping points
for Putin must have been even as hundreds of thousands
of troops, almost two hundred thousand troops were being placed
on Ukraine's borders.
Speaker 2 (29:14):
You still had Donald Trump cheerleading for Putin, right.
Speaker 1 (29:18):
It's unbelievable. It's unbelievable to think about, you know it is.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
But what the message for Putin is this, This is
potentially one of the front runners for twenty twenty four,
This is the guy that runs the Republican Party, and
that a war against Ukraine would come with little no consequences,
that the Republican establishment was not going.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
To hold Putin accountable for this war.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
That's the message that Trump and all his acolytes were
sending to Putin. That's why Putin felt so comfortable in
launching this war. That and you know, his misplaced chauvinism
about Russian power versus who the Ukrainians were. That's just
another historical feature of Russia and it's kind of imperialism
and domination of the region.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
But do you happen to know the death toll in
the Ukraine for Ukraine citizens and since its.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
Started, it's so there.
Speaker 3 (30:13):
The official numbers are frankly in the low tens of thousands.
Sounds like, you know, that is an absurd number, but
it's that's the official death till. The estimates are significantly
higher for places that the Russians are occupying, like Mariopol alone.
Expectations are that there were tens of thousands of people
(30:35):
killed there in Russia's attack on the city and population.
The toll for the Ukrainian military maybe you know, as
high as seventy eighty maybe one hundred thousand, which is
a catastrophic number. We're talking about a country with a
pre war population of about forty three million, and one
hundred thousand of their best and brightest have been killed
(30:58):
fighting to defend the country. Is not you know, the
Russians have been throwing their ash and trash, a lot
of their ash trash there prisoners, tens of thousands of
prisoners that were dragged into their ranks to fight against Ukraine.
But for Ukraine, it's a cross cutting of society. Artists, actors, musicians,
(31:20):
scientists have all signed up to do their patrioch duty
and defend their country, deferend their homes, defend their families,
and you know, they've taken punishing losses and it kind
of makes you sick if you think about, you.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
Know what this means for the future.
Speaker 3 (31:37):
Of society, and this war is not likely to end
anytime soon. Unfortunately. I think it's likely to last through.
There's a small chance that we'll get into some negotiations
towards the end of this year, but it's likely it
last twenty twenty four, in part because of the fact
that Putin.
Speaker 1 (31:54):
They want to see if Trump wins, right, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (31:56):
Putin may think that he could snatch victory from the
jaws of defeat in a favorable US election.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
We'll be right back with Alexander Vinman after this, m.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
M M.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
Many people have said that Trump is a Russian asset,
but I think he's too dumb to be that. But
he might be one, unknowingly, like just because he's not
very intelligent and he doesn't understand, uh, kind of the
inner workings of politics.
Speaker 3 (32:47):
He's easily manipulated. He is what's called called a unwitting
asset and a useful idiot. That's the that's the you know,
these are these are actually the technical terms that I uh,
let's say, you know, counterintelligence or intelligence would use to
describe him if they were going to assess him. The
reason is that he's probably not aware of the fact
that he's being run as an asset, that Putin was
(33:10):
pandering to him, pandering to his narcissism and his vanity.
And when Putin would you know, talk him up, saying
good job, Donald, keep it up, keep up the good work,
and knowing that Trump is a fanboys over Putin, was
the easy way to manipulate him. And the fact that
you know it, really it became quite apparent on my
(33:33):
first day and on the National Security Council when Trump
was having his press conference with Putin and Helsinki that
he was easily manipulated. Trump was easily manipulated into buying
Putin's lies over the assessment of the intelligence community.
Speaker 1 (33:49):
So it reminded me of a kid from the av
squad in high school finally getting the attention of the
quarterback and he felt all puffed up. And you know
by this horrible dictator, murderer, you know that this is
the person he admires. It should have been enough of
a warning sign for us, our our biggest international adversary
(34:11):
for how many decades? And that's who he Cozi's up to. Yeah,
I mean, I don't you.
Speaker 3 (34:15):
Know, the term of art is useful, idiot, But Frankly,
I think Trump is a useless idiot just you know,
just doesn't fit the quite that way.
Speaker 1 (34:24):
How do you explain his appeal? Do you have any ida?
I mean, you went to Harvard, so I feel like
I can ask you anything about pilotic Do you think
do you think it had anything to do with the
celebrity Apprentice because it was a number one show for
so many years and I think Americans believed what they
saw even though it was all a lie.
Speaker 3 (34:43):
Sure, I think you know there's something that you said
about showmanship and that Trump presented himself as an effective
leader and outsider when politics have been demonized, you know,
politicians are not to be heralded and praised for their
(35:05):
sacrifice in public service, but they're there now to be
kind of reviled as dirty, self serving, you know, kind.
Speaker 2 (35:14):
Of corrupt and so forth. That's when when.
Speaker 3 (35:18):
We take our political discourse towards attacking one one candidate
attacking another as corrupt. Uh, that's going to have a
toll on the general public. So the idea that this
guy was going to come in and drain the swamp
because he's an outsider that you know, government is too bloated,
(35:40):
like the Republicans have been saying it's ineffective that that
you know, we have we have a big government, our
tax dollars are being wasted. When when politicians say that
long enough, it's it's a propaganda threat that really starts
to kind of uh pervade the way people the way
people think about politics. And this guy was going to
come in to be an effective leader. Now nobody in
(36:03):
New York was going to buy that, because they knew
exactly was We'd been brought up recognizing that he's a
failure of fraud, you know, numerous bankruptcies and you know, infidelity.
Speaker 2 (36:16):
All sorts of other stuff.
Speaker 3 (36:17):
But the American public wasn't aware of that, and they
were effectively propagandized and convinced to believe it. And I
think that's part of it, But there was another part
of it, unfortunately, maybe more kind of insipid and dangerous.
He was willing to settle scores with the folks that
people felt they've been slighted by themselves, by diversity, by
(36:41):
you know, minorities that were taking their jobs, by all
of these things that you know are For whatever reason,
American public felt like they needed to settle a score
with and Trump was going to roll things back. He's
going to be regressive to give these folks their power.
So I think that that's a that is the more
(37:03):
dangerous component of this is that it kind of feeds
a base notion that you know, the reason that your
lot in life is so difficult is because somebody has
taken something that rightfully belonged to you, and Trump was
going to roll that back.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
What do you think will happen if he is found guilty?
Will he ever serve time?
Speaker 3 (37:22):
I think I think the fact is that I'm increasingly confident.
I think these there are four different indictments now having
different strength. I'd say that the first couple of indictments
uh probably weren't weren't the weighty ones and weren't going
to be sufficient to put him in irons. But his
(37:43):
indictment for uh mishandling classified information is very dangerous. These
are highly classified documents that he he stole, and potentially,
while the assessment is being done, it is hard to
fathom that other foreign intelligence networks that we're not aware
(38:07):
of the fact that he had all these classified documents,
were not looking to gain access to these documents.
Speaker 2 (38:12):
So he potentially.
Speaker 3 (38:13):
Compromised operations, compromised, Are you know, our intelligence at.
Speaker 1 (38:22):
On the ground for all those all those people who
were murdered, you know, is he responsible for that? You know?
I mean, so.
Speaker 3 (38:30):
That's that's that's what's being analyzed right now. So I
think that is a grave crime, and I think he's
likely to serve time for that. And then the insurrection itself,
I think we're going to learn a lot more. I mean,
I think those of us that have been paying attention
understood how central Trump was to the whole insurrection and
the violence against the Capitol.
Speaker 1 (38:51):
But he was completely the orchestrator of that, exactly right.
Speaker 3 (38:55):
And you know, again, to me, this is apparent because
I saw firsthand in two thousand eighteen with the squeeze
on Lensky.
Speaker 2 (39:02):
The rest of the public.
Speaker 3 (39:03):
Really learned about it only after he attempted to claim
the fact that he the election was stolen from of course,
that's because he failed to steal it himself.
Speaker 2 (39:13):
So he's doing a lot of nerdyritionging exactly So.
Speaker 3 (39:15):
I think he's he's likely to serve time, actually, and
so are his enablers, which is critically important. It's not
just the king pen but then enablers, because the messages
needs to be sent to other folks that you know,
if they support a criminal enterprise, they're going to pay
the price. So I'm looking forward to the day that,
you know, justice has served against Giuliani and Mark Meadows
(39:36):
and all these other enablers, all.
Speaker 1 (39:38):
Of the people on their roster got time. And I
just wonder, you know, what, where would we be able
to put him, to keep him quote unquote safe in
that environment. Where how would we be able to do that?
But partially, you know, whether or not he ends up
in jail to me, can't be the victory, although I
know he should. The fact that there are all of
these indictments and that were people like you, like who
(40:02):
at the courage to stand up for what's right. You know,
all of these DA's and all of these people who
refuse to bow to him, you know, they all deserve
to be put on a pedestal like I believe you do,
because you are what it means to be an American
in my mind.
Speaker 2 (40:20):
You know, it's.
Speaker 3 (40:20):
Interesting when I was testifying, I'm, for some reason, kind
of one of the more notable figures. But there were
lots of my colleagues that were up there with me,
and for me, one of the silver linings from the
whole episode was thought that the American public could see
behind the curtain about the excellence of public service and
(40:42):
excellent public service that their tax dollars were going towards.
So you know, we're seeing that the same kind of
we're seeing that play out with the district attorneys, with
the other law enforcement officers the courts that are again
public servants doing the right thing, and that is not
(41:04):
something that's you know, kind of displayed on a regular
basis there. Instead, it's the narratives around that public servants
are a waste of resources, a waste of dollars, and
stuff like that. So I continue to try to take
every opportunity to elevate public service because it made me
in part of who I am. And yes, there are
countless thousands of public servants out there that are doing
(41:25):
their best to defend US national security, hold the line,
make sure that this country is governed by the role
of law.
Speaker 1 (41:33):
So important. I mean, do you think that there will
be another politician with his kind of cult like status.
Do you think, like I look at DeSantis and I
think he doesn't have that thing whatever that thing is
whether that was you know, many years on a reality
show that portrayed him as someone he is not, or
whether it was some in a twisted charisma. I mean,
(41:57):
I don't know, but I don't see another one like
him coming to power.
Speaker 3 (42:02):
I think I think that is a hopeful perspective, and
I hope you're right. I think there are going to
be people that try to emulate it. I think, for instance,
RFK Junior is attempting to kind of juice the same
system on the left, although frankly he's you know, I
don't see what what that policies of his aligned with
kind of progressive.
Speaker 1 (42:23):
No, or his experience. He doesn't have any experience in
terms of politics.
Speaker 3 (42:28):
You know, sim kind of cult leadership though that he's
trying to trying to tap.
Speaker 1 (42:32):
Yeah, he I think liberals and Democrats are not taking
a shine to him. I think even his own family,
the Kennedy family, has said no, we do not support him.
So I don't even take him seriously, to tell you
the truth.
Speaker 2 (42:45):
I think that's right.
Speaker 3 (42:46):
I think people will attempt to emulate some of his
some of Trump's success in terms of you know, just
this unbelievably ironclad support from segments of society. But after
twenty twenty four, after his defeat in the next general election,
(43:06):
hopefully by larger margin, it's going to be close no
matter what. We're probably talking about two three four percent.
That's way too close for comfort between.
Speaker 1 (43:14):
The Tsards to believe. You know, Alex, when you see
those newscasters who go into the Trump rallies and the
people are covered in their Trump swag and they say
the most absurd things like Joe Biden is dead and
that's actor James Woods, I'm like, these people are serious.
(43:34):
They're seriously saying this to a newscaster. I don't understand
the state of delusion, mass delusion. It's like, we need
people to get them out of the cult, and how
do we do that. I think it starts with these trials.
I think it starts with him being found guilty. I
think it starts with people seeing I think it's happening.
(43:55):
Do you think it's happening.
Speaker 2 (43:56):
I think it's happening.
Speaker 3 (43:58):
I think that plus the loss pretty significant loss in
twenty twenty four, nobody really you know, we like our underdogs,
but we probably don't like our people to lose repeatedly,
So I think that's going to take a lot of
the lustyre off, but the trials themselves are going to
be critically important to pull back the curtain on you know,
(44:19):
everything he's done to harm.
Speaker 1 (44:20):
This country, and God knows, there's a lot of things. Yeah,
how's your brother doing. I'm curious about him? What you do?
You took off and got yourself a doctorate and are
working and is your brother as well as he did
he transition into something else he did.
Speaker 3 (44:37):
He left service in August, so he's been out for
just about a year. In that time, he's been working
with the Department of State to hold the Russians accountable.
Speaker 2 (44:48):
For war crimes in Ukraine. He's to Ukraine thirteen times.
Speaker 3 (44:52):
He's heading actually to Ukraine and next several days for
his thirteenth trip. Within a year, he and I worked
together on a bunch of different projects. We have humanitarian
efforts to help equip the Ukrainian National Guard, to direct resources.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
I mean, I've.
Speaker 3 (45:10):
Established, you know, nonprofit to try to help Ukraine, all
sorts of different ideas to try to We're working on
d mining, We're working on veterans care for the Ukrainian
Armed Services. Lots of folks that need to be integrated,
both with heavy wounds and you know, with just psychological
(45:31):
scars back into study, all sorts of different projects that
try to be helpful.
Speaker 1 (45:35):
Yeah, you served as well. I don't know if people
remember that that you served in Iraq, I believe right, Yeah,
how long were you there? How long?
Speaker 2 (45:44):
So I was there for a year.
Speaker 3 (45:47):
Eugene retired as his last position was as a colonel
and a judge advocate general. So like an attorney in
the military, we both served. We spent our careers in
the military. I serve on the border between North and
South Korea, in Ukraine and Russia for three years, all
(46:08):
sorts of different postings around the world.
Speaker 1 (46:11):
So lots of more thank you for your service, needless
to say, you're one there fighting the war. Was you know,
unbelievably courageous and brave and enlisting and serving the country
that way. But you know, your courage and standing up
to this horrific administration and all of the damage it
has done will leave you a hero in the history
(46:32):
books and admired and adored by people all over this
country who believe what you believe. That you know here
you know right matters.
Speaker 2 (46:43):
Well, thank you very much. I appreciate that. Do I
recall that you have connections also to some military service.
Speaker 1 (46:50):
Yes, my son is was a marine for four years,
and yeah, he hurt his back and that was kind
of a bummer for him because he wanted to have
a career in the military. And sure, you know, as
a mom, that was a very hard thing. You know,
I don't know what your stepmom felt. I'm sure your
dad was supportive, but for moms, I don't know. It
(47:11):
was a maybe dad's too. It was a terrifying concept
when he said to me, you know, his left wing,
liberal democratic mother, anti war, you know, I'm going to
go join I was like, dear God, anything but this.
But I'm so proud of him, and I'm proud of
everyone who chooses to do that and defend this country.
Although I do wish we could abolish war in some
way and settle our differences, like saying adults not like
(47:34):
you know, people from two hundred years ago. Sure listen.
My love to your wife, Rachel, your daughter, and your
whole family. I want to thank you for doing this.
I've wanted to speak to you for a very long time,
and my admiration is unending.
Speaker 3 (47:50):
Thank you very much. I'm glad we get finally connected. Surprise,
it took us this long, but looking forward to speaking
to you.
Speaker 1 (47:55):
Against Hen I know exactly. We had some Twitter interaction
there a little bit, but yeah, definitely, But thank you
for doing this, and I hope to hear from you
if the troll win the trial ends, I would love
to do this again so that we could uh take
a gander it at where we ended up.
Speaker 2 (48:12):
Sounds good.
Speaker 1 (48:12):
Thank you all right, Alex, thank you so much. I
hope you enjoyed that. You know, we tend to run
a little along with these kinds of conversations, so we
don't have time for questions today. Next week the one
and only Kathy Griffin. Don't miss it. We drop on
Tuesdays onward with Rosie o'donald
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.