the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Ukraine Expert vs Ukraine Treaty

Posted by Jeff Id on October 29, 2019

So today, from the ever left New York Times, we have a new breathless report on the big orange man.

Army Officer Who Heard Trump’s Ukraine Call Reported Concerns

An army officer, identified in the article as Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman, is the latest impeachment witness willing to talk to the Democrats.  Mr. Vindman is touted as “the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council” and says he twice reported concerns about the President.

The times reports the Lt. Col. as saying:

“I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine,” Colonel Vindman said in his statement. “I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained.”

Now if Mr. Vindman didn’t say that, it wouldn’t surprise as this is the New York Times but if he did say that and he is an expert, why doesn’t he know about the 1999 treaty with Ukraine titled:

TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND UKRAINE ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS WITH ANNEX, SIGNED AT KIEV ON JULY 22, 1998, AND WITH AN EXCHANGE OF NOTES SIGNED ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1999, WHICH PROVIDES FOR ITS PROVISIONAL APPLICATION

A summary of the very first article of the treaty is included with the full treaty in this link and is copied below:

Article 1 sets forth a non-exclusive list of the major types of as-
sistance to be provided under the Treaty, including taking the tes-
timony or statements of persons; providing documents, records and
other items of evidence; locating or identifying persons or items;
serving documents; transferring persons in custody for testimony or
other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; as-
sisting in proceedings related to immobilization and forfeiture of
assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and, rendering any other
form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the Requested
State. The scope of the Treaty includes not only criminal offenses,
but also proceedings related to criminal matters, which may be
civil or administrative in nature

So it’s not appropriate to investigate the Biden’s because they are American but we have a treaty signed by Al Gore for that explicit purpose.  I don’t think that’s a terribly accurate statement by Lieutenant Colonel Vindman now is it.  But wait, there’s more!!

Article 2 provides for the establishment of Central Authorities
and defines Central Authorities for purposes of the Treaty. For the
United States, the Central Authority shall be the Attorney General
or a person designated by the Attorney General. For Ukraine, the
Central Authority shall be the Ministry of Justice and the Office
of the Prosecutor General. The article provides that the Central
Authorities shall communicate directly with one another for the
purposes of the Treaty.

 

So the correct person to make contact with Ukraine for purposes of the investigation is Attorney General Barr – Didn’t Trump say something exactly like that?  Huh?

It keeps getting better though.

In addition, a request may be denied if its execution
would prejudice the security or similar essential interests of the
Requested State, or if it is not made in conformity with the Treaty

So per Mr. Vindman’s apparently world renown expert status, he should know that Ukraine has the option of refusing to help if they were concerned that ‘bipartisan’ support could be lost and would affect their national security.   He is way outside of his purview to be the one who is concerned about bipartisan support, that is Ukraines job and right per the treaty.

 

 

So if the treaty with Ukraine is NOT for investigation of Americans, why would it state:

“Assistance shall be provided without regard to whether the conduct that is the subject of the investigation, prosecution, or proceeding in the Requesting State would constitute…..”

The only folks subject to laws in the ‘Requesting State’ are citizens of that state or visitors actually in that state.   It seems impossible that the ‘expert’ on Ukraine could have the opinion that the treaty with Ukraine is inappropriate, and it seems very likely that this is just another leftist coup member.   I hope he goes down with the rest when this all blows up in their faces.

Fake

Fake

Fake

BTW, this is an entirely separate issue from the Obama administration using FAKE Russian documents payed for by the Clinton campaign to get a FISA court warrant to spy on Trump.  Which they did, and they committed a literal shit-ton of felonies on the way.  Trump’s actions, even if he used the leverage of assistance (which there is zero evidence of thus far) are perfectly within the law.   He’s allowed to use foreign aid to force investigations into almost anything he likes, especially when the person being investigated, admitted to the crimes on tape.  Being a political opponent does not grant immunity as Trump has been well taught by the Democrats.  Don’t forget, they were talking impeachment well before Trump even took office.

 

 


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: