General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe strategy is releasing a second phone call
They have no intention of releasing the first.
global1
(25,241 posts)of this current call. The abbreviated account that the WH released was edited. I know that testimony of people in the room that heard the call have filled in some of the blanks that implicate Trump. But why - when Trump says 'read the transcript' and says it was a perfect call - isn't pressure put on him to release the complete and unredacted transcript or a recording of the call?
They need to be relentless with Trump by demanding the full transcript. They can't let up. Every chance they get - they must put pressure on him to release the full transcript. Badger him for it every chance they get.
maxsolomon
(33,310 posts)Col. Vindman testified that his edits were ignored.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,173 posts)Perhaps we'll know what those edits were.
global1
(25,241 posts)and why with the 'edited version' of the call that the WH did release - did it say something to the effect that this was an edited version?
maxsolomon
(33,310 posts)there's always a disclaimer like that. it's not recorded, but the note takers all coordinate and others review and edit to get to as complete a transcript as possible.
per Vindman, that was limited (by Eisenberg? not sure) to limit the damage.
what got squirreled away on the secret server was bad enough.
bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)Being fluent in English, Ukrainian, and Russian coupled with his military/technical background could have provided alternative or nuanced variations.
Subtle differences could show a much stronger reaction from Ukrainian PM than conveyed by the "official" version.
kentuck
(111,079 posts)...or in some contradicted his call that is proof of attempted bribery.
GeorgeGist
(25,319 posts)it's an old technique to confuse the unwashed masses.