If the Vindman v. Trump, et al. LOLsuit survives motions to dismiss and proceeds to discovery, the defendants are going to have the opportunity to pose interrogatories and conduct depositions under oath.
Vindman says that he only discussed the Zelensky phone call with George Kent and the “whistleblower” (who has been identified as Eric Ciaramella). What exactly was discussed?
Ciaramella will undoubtedly be asked about his interactions with Adam Schiff, which should lead to Schiff being deposed as well.
Given the recently published 2016 State Department from George Kent expressing concern about the appearance of corruption in Hunter Biden’s Burisma connections, the defendants will surely seek to gather evidence supporting Trump’s legitimate concerns about the Biden’s. Vindman’s bias will be throughly explored.
IANAL, but I believe I can see fairly obvious deficiencies in this complaint.
UPDATE—The first deficiency I’ve noticed is the apparently false characterization of the 25 July, 2019, between Presidents Trump and Zelensky as coercive. The transcript provided by the White House Situation Room notetakers (which included Vindman) seem to reflect a cordial conversation. Indeed, when Trump asks about investigations into Ukrainian involvement in US affairs, the transcript shows Zelensky’s reply as, “Yes it is very important for me and everything that you just mentioned earlier.” When the Biden’s are brought up, Zelensky relies, “The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty of the case.” Zelensky seems to be ahead of Trump on the matter.