The twisted logic is claiming Trump somehow “betrayed US national security interests” by delaying foreign money aid to Ukraine. How was the US endangered?
Democrat witnesses under oath testified the money aid was purely symbolic.
Why would they say that? If true, the aid then is not even needed and Trump could not have possibly put Ukraine at risk by delaying the aid a few weeks.
They said that because the Democrats were stuck. One of a number of reasons for the hold was to incent NATO to do more. The Democrat witnesses, under oath, also testified that NATO gave Ukraine more than enough money aid, so Trump is wrong, he’s guilty as charged.
Why the contradiction? So why was the US aid needed at all and how could Trump have possibly jeopardized Ukraine’s “survival”. And why by the way is a tiny sliver of Eastern Ukraine a US national security interest to begin with?
Wait, wait, there’s more. The Democrats argued the anti-tank Javelins were essential to Ukraine’s survival? Are they? In fact, the military hardware aid was not even on hold by Trump. And, Obama at least knew to refuse Javelins to Ukraine because he knew the truth. Ukrainians are in an ethnic cultural separatist civil war. West vs. East, not Kyiv in a “hot war” with Russia.
“Ukraine troops, separatists withdraw amid
hopes for peace”
Funny, not a single Democrat witness mentioned, separatists. Even Zelensky uses the word, Macron uses it.
The American people were lied to about Vietnam, lied to about Afghanistan, lied to about Iraq, lied to about Turkey/N Syria, lied to about Ukraine, lied to about Iran.