ANALYSIS: Democrats Have A Colonel Vindman Problem

[wamose]

It takes a real dweeb to be taken in by this bogus impeachment charade. It's all so obviously contrived.

Trump did something wrong, even his republican supporters admit that. The Dems wanted him fired for it plus his 3 years of antics. I think it’s a bad political move but the constitution grants them the authority to try and do so. We shall see if they can make a compelling case.

Trump did something wrong. WTF does that mean? Did he leave the toilet seat up? That sounds almost as bad as Omar saying some people did some things on 9/11. In reality, Trump did nothing. He did manage to rile up a bunch of establishment liberal elitists who retaliated because he threatened to blow the lid off their corrupt and rigged government scams. But if you dogs want to keep chasing cars and biting their tires, there's not much we can do to stop you. Seriously man, can't you see the idiocy of this sham?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Thornberry is a fucking moron and I never said there weren't republicans that wouldn't back Trump. In fact I specifically said there were!

And if you accept the wicked partisan premise of Adam Schiff, that Trump wanted Zelinsky to dig up dirt on Biden (which is bullshit) then of course you will have problems making Trump look good. You will also have problems making that case in a fair impeachment hearing since no such such thing ever happened.

Trump never ever said you dig up dirt on Joe Biden or I'm cutting off aid to Ukraine. Period! Good luck proving otherwise.

But if Trump was asking Zelinsky to find out where seven billion dollars of US aid to Ukraine went and to get to the bottom of epic corruption in Ukraine's gas and oil industry, so much so that Burisma put the Biden kid on their payroll as a firewall against investigations by the US then yes, of course. Trump has every right and duty to find out where all our aid money was.
Firm Hired by Ukraine’s Burisma Tried to Use Hunter Biden as Leverage, Documents Show
Emails Reveal Burisma Consulting Firm Leveraged Hunter Biden To Get State Dept. Meetings

Please explain to me why any US president should NOT want to look into Burisma
and their corruption vis the US because it might hurt Joe Biden?


He also has a right and duty to find out why Ukrainian highly placed sources were working in conjunction with Russia to influence the 2016 election in favor of the head of the Clinton crime family.

 

[Slade3200]

It takes a real dweeb to be taken in by this bogus impeachment charade. It's all so obviously contrived.

Trump did something wrong, even his republican supporters admit that. The Dems wanted him fired for it plus his 3 years of antics. I think it’s a bad political move but the constitution grants them the authority to try and do so. We shall see if they can make a compelling case.

Trump did something wrong. WTF does that mean? Did he leave the toilet seat up? That sounds almost as bad as Omar saying some people did some things on 9/11. In reality, Trump did nothing. He did manage to rile up a bunch of establishment liberal elitists who retaliated because he threatened to blow the lid off their corrupt and rigged government scams. But if you dogs want to keep chasing cars and biting their tires, there's not much we can do to stop you. Seriously man, can't you see the idiocy of this sham?

it means he shouldn’t have held military aid in exchange for a foreign president to announce investigations into the DNC and Biden. There’s a proper path to take to address both the aid and the crowdstrike/Biden situations and the way he did it was wrong. Whether it was criminal would depend on the evidence collected, whether he gets impeached will depend on how congress votes.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Id also wager that few to none on this board have the 340 page testimony from Vindman so all those who are so quick to agree with one guys analysis are being willfully ignorant stooges

Would you say the same about yourself after just admitting YOU don't have access to Vindmans's testimony yet YOU
are very certain York is full of crap? I'll bet not.

I don't need 340 pages of testimony to judge this Deep State "hero" based on what I already know about him.
Transcript Shows Vindman, Schiff Repeatedly Obstructed Questions About Classified Leaks
And I sure as hell don't need to read 340 pages of dry testimony to already know Schiff is running a fixed Soviet style show trial.

 

[Slade3200]

Thornberry is a fucking moron and I never said there weren't republicans that wouldn't back Trump. In fact I specifically said there were!

And if you accept the wicked partisan premise of Adam Schiff, that Trump wanted Zelinsky to dig up dirt on Biden (which is bullshit) then of course you will have problems making Trump look good. You will also have problems making that case in a fair impeachment hearing since no such such thing ever happened.

Trump never ever said you dig up dirt on Joe Biden or I'm cutting off aid to Ukraine. Period! Good luck proving otherwise.

But if Trump was asking Zelinsky to find out where seven billion dollars of US aid to Ukraine went and to get to the bottom of epic corruption in Ukraine's gas and oil industry, so much so that Burisma put the Biden kid on their payroll as a firewall against investigations by the US then yes, of course. Trump has every right and duty to find out where all our aid money was.
Firm Hired by Ukraine’s Burisma Tried to Use Hunter Biden as Leverage, Documents Show

He also has a right and duty to find out why Ukrainian highly placed sources were working in conjunction with Russia to influence the 2016 election in favor of the head of the Clinton crime family.

You literally just said, and I quote “And no supporters admit Trump did something wrong.”

I just posted a quote of a Trump supporter saying it was wrong. Your response was, “Thornberry is a fucking moron and I never said there weren't republicans that wouldn't back Trump. In fact I specifically said there were!”

I notice you didn’t include the thread in your last response to make it harder to see your actual statements, don’t worry I’ll keep it real. What game are you playing here?!

 

[Slade3200]

Id also wager that few to none on this board have the 340 page testimony from Vindman so all those who are so quick to agree with one guys analysis are being willfully ignorant stooges

Would you say the same about yourself after just admitting YOU don't have access to Vindmans's testimony yet YOU
are very certain York is full of crap? I'll bet not.

I don't need 340 pages of testimony to judge this Deep State "hero" based on what I already know about him.
Transcript Shows Vindman, Schiff Repeatedly Obstructed Questions About Classified Leaks
And I sure as hell don't need to read 340 pages of dry testimony to already know Schiff is running a fixed Soviet style show trial.

When did I say York was full of crap? Never. When did I say I had no access to the testimony? Never.

Cause I remember saying that I had no problem with York’s analysis and no basis to critique because I hadn’t read the testimony. You just admitted that you didn’t read the testimony either yet you know enough to make all these judgements based on other people’s analysis. That makes you an ignorant puppet. Way to go! That’s twice now I’ve corrected your false statements about me. Stick to the facts or go play in the badlands. You’re turning this thread into more of a joke than it already is.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

You literally just said, and I quote “And no supporters admit Trump did something wrong.”

I just posted a quote of a Trump supporter saying it was wrong. Your response was, “Thornberry is a fucking moron and I never said there weren't republicans that wouldn't back Trump. In fact I specifically said there were!”

I notice you didn’t include the thread in your last response to make it harder to see your actual statements, don’t worry I’ll keep it real. What game are you playing here?!

Oh, okay! Don't shoot me Sherlock! It just so happens I wasn't aware of this Texas politician and his comments until brought to my attention.

And it just so happens more importantly Mac Thornberry happens to be a Never Trumper Texas Republicans in Congress Not United Behind Trump
and I specifically mentioned the utter lack of backing Trump gets from republicans like that!

So you keep on keeping it real, moron! Thornberry is not what I would call a Trump supporter and as far as I know he was such a horrible "supporter" for Trump on the news show because he is bailing out on Congress anyway and wants to be the worst possible "friend" ABC could find to give Trump a black eye.
And we all know what ABC's journalistic standards are like, don't we? Fuck off, you gullible dope!

Your last two sentences were especially obtuse and undecipherable, just so you know.

 

[RealDave]

ANALYSIS: Democrats Have A Colonel Vindman Problem​

ANALYSIS: Democrats have a Colonel Vindman problem
November 11, 2019 ~ By Byron York
House Democrats conducted their impeachment interviews in secret, but Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman still emerged as star of the show. Appearing at his Oct. 29 deposition in full dress uniform, the decorated Army officer, now a White House National Security Council Ukraine expert, was the first witness who had actually listened to the phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that is at the heart of the Democratic impeachment campaign. Even though lawmakers were forbidden to discuss his testimony in public, Vindman's leaked opening statement that "I did not think it was proper [for Trump] to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen" exploded on news reports. Vindman has not yet been scheduled to appear before the Democrats' public impeachment hearings. When that happens, he will undoubtedly again play a prominent role. But there will be a difference. The public now has a transcript of Vindman's deposition. And those who have taken the trouble to read the 340-page document will have a different picture of Vindman's testimony than the one presented in early media reports.
Yes, Vindman testified repeatedly that he "thought it was wrong" for Trump, speaking with Zelensky, to bring up the 2016 election and allegations of Ukraine-related corruption on the part of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. But the Vindman transcript also showed a witness whose testimony was filled with opinion, with impressions, who had little new to offer, who withheld important information from the committee, who was steeped in a bureaucracy that has often been hostile to the president, and whose lawyer, presumably with Vindman's approval, expressed unmistakable disdain, verging on contempt, for members of Congress who asked inconvenient questions. In short, Vindman's testimony was not the slam-dunk hit Democrats portrayed it to be.



Comment:
How many times has a President had his confidential phone calls put out in the public domain right after he took office? No wonder President Trump does not trust the State Department along with other agencies.
From the beginning, I've given Vindman the benefit of the doubt because of his military service. My opinion then was influenced by an article I read urging Republicans to lay off of him when he first came onto the scene. At this point, though, things just don't feel right. A Ukranian born man spending his time-sharing under the table advisement to Ukraine in order to handicap U.S. foreign policy he didn't like is a bridge too far. If we can spend two years accusing Trump of being a Russian again, I think Vindman is probably fair game. I don't care if you don't like the decisions of the President, they are the elected party in this equation. High-minded, arrogant bureaucrats are not supposed to be running this country.
Being removed from the NSC is the least of Vindman's worries. When he's done being a pawn for the Progressive Marxist Socialist Left and especially Adam Schiff, he's almost certainly going to bear scrutiny under the UCMJ and/or by the DOJ for his illegal leaking. What he shared with the whistle-blower was top secret information and Vindman has no special immunity to go outside of the chain of command with his complaints.
This guy needs to be nailed to the wall. Letting someone subvert the Office of the Presidency the way he did, including likely committing crimes, can not stand. For the sake of everyone's trust in our institutions, a message must be sent that this won't be tolerated.

I have news, They loyalty is to the country.

 

[wamose]

It takes a real dweeb to be taken in by this bogus impeachment charade. It's all so obviously contrived.

Trump did something wrong, even his republican supporters admit that. The Dems wanted him fired for it plus his 3 years of antics. I think it’s a bad political move but the constitution grants them the authority to try and do so. We shall see if they can make a compelling case.

Trump did something wrong. WTF does that mean? Did he leave the toilet seat up? That sounds almost as bad as Omar saying some people did some things on 9/11. In reality, Trump did nothing. He did manage to rile up a bunch of establishment liberal elitists who retaliated because he threatened to blow the lid off their corrupt and rigged government scams. But if you dogs want to keep chasing cars and biting their tires, there's not much we can do to stop you. Seriously man, can't you see the idiocy of this sham?

it means he shouldn’t have held military aid in exchange for a foreign president to announce investigations into the DNC and Biden. There’s a proper path to take to address both the aid and the crowdstrike/Biden situations and the way he did it was wrong. Whether it was criminal would depend on the evidence collected, whether he gets impeached will depend on how congress votes.

Neither you or anyone else can prove a quid pro quo. One wasn't requested or even insinuated. It's all in the imaginative interpretation of the weak liberal mind. Y'all been running this coup since the day Trump was elected. You people are either guilty of treason or you're insane.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

I have news, They loyalty is to the country.

Which country? The one drunken assholes like you want but can't have because we still elect presidents here, despite seditious deep state pricks like Vindman?
Or the country that still plays by the Constitutional system's way of doing things?

 

[Slade3200]

You literally just said, and I quote “And no supporters admit Trump did something wrong.”

I just posted a quote of a Trump supporter saying it was wrong. Your response was, “Thornberry is a fucking moron and I never said there weren't republicans that wouldn't back Trump. In fact I specifically said there were!”

I notice you didn’t include the thread in your last response to make it harder to see your actual statements, don’t worry I’ll keep it real. What game are you playing here?!

Oh, okay! Don't shoot me Sherlock! It just so happens I wasn't aware of this Texas politician and his comments until brought to my attention.

And it just so happens more importantly Mac Thornberry happens to be a Never Trumper Texas Republicans in Congress Not United Behind Trump
and I specifically mentioned the utter lack of backing Trump gets from republicans like that!

So you keep on keeping it real, moron! Thornberry is not what I would call a Trump supporter and as far as I know he was such a horrible "supporter" for Trump on the news show because he is bailing out on Congress anyway and wants to be the worst possible "friend" ABC could find to give Trump a black eye.
And we all know what ABC's journalistic standards are like, don't we? Fuck off, you gullible dope!

Your last two sentences were especially obtuse and undecipherable, just so you know.

Thats fine, I don’t expect you to know everything, but when I show you evidence to back up the things I say have a little humility and admit I was right... don’t get all defensive and then lie about the things that have been said.
Also if you had read the article you would see that Thornberry was actually sticking up for Trump. He just got labeled a never trumper because he is able to speak the truth when Trump steps out of line. Lindsay Graham and Ted Cruz are also part of the never trump list you posted from 2016. Get real man. You’re drowning here

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

When did I say York was full of crap? Never.

Only in the second post of this thread, though not in so many exact words.

When did I say I had no access to the testimony? Never.

You said you haven't read of any of Vindman's testimony. If you have his testimony you haven't read it. So why are you game playing making distinctions when there is no difference in it? I know you are looking to save face but this is no the way.
It only makes you look more petty and starved for some sort of little "victory".

Cause I remember saying that I had no problem with York’s analysis and no basis to critique because I hadn’t read the testimony. You just admitted that you didn’t read the testimony either yet you know enough to make all these judgements based on other people’s analysis. That makes you an ignorant puppet. Way to go!

I know from many sources, some of which I've linked, what sort of clown Vindman is. And I already said as much so congratulations, you braying fool,
for getting it wrong once again.

That’s twice now I’ve corrected your false statements about me. Stick to the facts or go play in the badlands. You’re turning this thread into more of a joke than it already is.

And that's twice I've showed you up and corrected you.
GFY, as they say.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Thats fine, I don’t expect you to know everything, but when I show you evidence to back up the things I say have a little humility and admit I was right... don’t get all defensive and then lie about the things that have been said.

I haven't lied about a thing and if you want to be cut off this is the way to do it.

Also if you had read the article you would see that Thornberry was actually sticking up for Trump.

He would have no credibility as a Never Trumper if he didn't say something positive once in awhile, to keep up appearances, though I don't remember any such thing.
He said once Trump should be acquitted. What sort of fake credibility would he have if he didn't at least say that?

He just got labeled a never trumper because he is able to speak the truth when Trump steps out of line. Lindsay Graham and Ted Cruz are also part of the never trump list you posted from 2016. Get real man. You’re drowning here

Cruz and Graham have shown they have come around. Still waiting for that little turd Thornberry
to stop sticking a shiv in his back. His performance was a masterful job of "defending" someone to death. Or are you just that dim witted?

 

[Slade3200]

When did I say York was full of crap? Never.

Only in the second post of this thread, though not in so many exact words.

When did I say I had no access to the testimony? Never.

You said you haven't read of any of Vindman's testimony. If you have his testimony you haven't read it. So why are you game playing making distinctions when there is no difference in it? I know you are looking to save face but this is no the way.
It only makes you look more petty and starved for some sort of little "victory".

Cause I remember saying that I had no problem with York’s analysis and no basis to critique because I hadn’t read the testimony. You just admitted that you didn’t read the testimony either yet you know enough to make all these judgements based on other people’s analysis. That makes you an ignorant puppet. Way to go!

I know from many sources, some of which I've linked, what sort of clown Vindman is. And I already said as much so congratulations, you braying fool,
for getting it wrong once again.

That’s twice now I’ve corrected your false statements about me. Stick to the facts or go play in the badlands. You’re turning this thread into more of a joke than it already is.

And that's twice I've showed you up and corrected you.
GFY, as they say.

Me: when did I say York was full of crap?

You: In your second post but not in so many words.

haha. That says it all... thanks for playing.

 

[Slade3200]

Thornberry is a fucking moron and I never said there weren't republicans that wouldn't back Trump. In fact I specifically said there were!

And if you accept the wicked partisan premise of Adam Schiff, that Trump wanted Zelinsky to dig up dirt on Biden (which is bullshit) then of course you will have problems making Trump look good. You will also have problems making that case in a fair impeachment hearing since no such such thing ever happened.

Trump never ever said you dig up dirt on Joe Biden or I'm cutting off aid to Ukraine. Period! Good luck proving otherwise.

But if Trump was asking Zelinsky to find out where seven billion dollars of US aid to Ukraine went and to get to the bottom of epic corruption in Ukraine's gas and oil industry, so much so that Burisma put the Biden kid on their payroll as a firewall against investigations by the US then yes, of course. Trump has every right and duty to find out where all our aid money was.
Firm Hired by Ukraine’s Burisma Tried to Use Hunter Biden as Leverage, Documents Show
Emails Reveal Burisma Consulting Firm Leveraged Hunter Biden To Get State Dept. Meetings

Please explain to me why any US president should NOT want to look into Burisma
and their corruption vis the US because it might hurt Joe Biden?


He also has a right and duty to find out why Ukrainian highly placed sources were working in conjunction with Russia to influence the 2016 election in favor of the head of the Clinton crime family.

Here’s some more people for you to hate that have spoken to the effect that Trump fucked up on that phone call:

1. Former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley: “It is not a good practice for us ever to ask a foreign country to investigate an American.” But “I don’t see it as impeachable.”
2. Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Tex.): “I believe that it is inappropriate for a president to ask a foreign leader to investigate a political rival. ... I believe it was inappropriate. I don’t believe it was impeachable.”
3. Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.): “What I am telling you is that, if it can be demonstrated that the president asked for and had the requisite state of mind, that the president asked for an investigation of a political rival, that’s over the line. ... But if he asked for an investigation of possible corruption by someone who happens to be a political rival, that’s not over the line.”
4. Rep. Will Hurd (R-Tex.): “I think if you’re trying to get information on a political rival to use in a political campaign, it is not something a president or any official should be doing.”
5. Former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice: “I don’t like for the president of the United States to mention an American citizen for investigation to a foreign leader. I think that is out of bounds.”
6. Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio): “I thought it was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign government to investigate a political opponent.” But “I also do not think it’s an impeachable offense.”
7. Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.): “While the conversation reported in the memorandum relating to alleged Ukrainian corruption and Vice President Biden’s son was inappropriate, it does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.”
8. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah): “By all appearances, the President’s brazen and unprecedented appeal to China and to Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden is wrong and appalling.”
9. Russia ambassador nominee John Sullivan: “Soliciting investigations into a domestic political opponent — I don’t think that would be in accord with our values.”
10. European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland: “I believe I testified that it would be improper to do that.” Asked whether it would be illegal: “I’m not a lawyer, but I assume so.”
11. Rep Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.): “It is highly inappropriate if it was done.” (Kinzinger said this before the rough transcript of Trump’s call was released.)
12. Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.): Trump’s conduct with regard to Ukraine is “not OK.”
13. Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.): “Hold up: Americans don’t look to Chinese commies for the truth. If the Biden kid broke laws by selling his name to Beijing, that’s a matter for American courts, not communist tyrants running torture camps.”
14. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine): “I thought the president made a big mistake by asking China to get involved in investigating a political opponent. It’s completely inappropriate.”

 

[Coyote]

ANALYSIS: Democrats Have A Colonel Vindman Problem​

ANALYSIS: Democrats have a Colonel Vindman problem
November 11, 2019 ~ By Byron York
House Democrats conducted their impeachment interviews in secret, but Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman still emerged as star of the show. Appearing at his Oct. 29 deposition in full dress uniform, the decorated Army officer, now a White House National Security Council Ukraine expert, was the first witness who had actually listened to the phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that is at the heart of the Democratic impeachment campaign. Even though lawmakers were forbidden to discuss his testimony in public, Vindman's leaked opening statement that "I did not think it was proper [for Trump] to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen" exploded on news reports. Vindman has not yet been scheduled to appear before the Democrats' public impeachment hearings. When that happens, he will undoubtedly again play a prominent role. But there will be a difference. The public now has a transcript of Vindman's deposition. And those who have taken the trouble to read the 340-page document will have a different picture of Vindman's testimony than the one presented in early media reports.
Yes, Vindman testified repeatedly that he "thought it was wrong" for Trump, speaking with Zelensky, to bring up the 2016 election and allegations of Ukraine-related corruption on the part of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. But the Vindman transcript also showed a witness whose testimony was filled with opinion, with impressions, who had little new to offer, who withheld important information from the committee, who was steeped in a bureaucracy that has often been hostile to the president, and whose lawyer, presumably with Vindman's approval, expressed unmistakable disdain, verging on contempt, for members of Congress who asked inconvenient questions. In short, Vindman's testimony was not the slam-dunk hit Democrats portrayed it to be.



Comment:
How many times has a President had his confidential phone calls put out in the public domain right after he took office? No wonder President Trump does not trust the State Department along with other agencies.
From the beginning, I've given Vindman the benefit of the doubt because of his military service. My opinion then was influenced by an article I read urging Republicans to lay off of him when he first came onto the scene. At this point, though, things just don't feel right. A Ukranian born man spending his time-sharing under the table advisement to Ukraine in order to handicap U.S. foreign policy he didn't like is a bridge too far. If we can spend two years accusing Trump of being a Russian again, I think Vindman is probably fair game. I don't care if you don't like the decisions of the President, they are the elected party in this equation. High-minded, arrogant bureaucrats are not supposed to be running this country.
Being removed from the NSC is the least of Vindman's worries. When he's done being a pawn for the Progressive Marxist Socialist Left and especially Adam Schiff, he's almost certainly going to bear scrutiny under the UCMJ and/or by the DOJ for his illegal leaking. What he shared with the whistle-blower was top secret information and Vindman has no special immunity to go outside of the chain of command with his complaints.
This guy needs to be nailed to the wall. Letting someone subvert the Office of the Presidency the way he did, including likely committing crimes, can not stand. For the sake of everyone's trust in our institutions, a message must be sent that this won't be tolerated.

So it's known, dirt bags fit in army uniforms to. He is just another government shit sack. Fuck him, fuck his uniform. All it is is a prop to people like him and Schiff.

Is it any wonder why people are disgusted by Trump supporters like yourself?! #ProudAndDeplorable

Trump supporter? No. Trump policy supporter? Mostly. Little gubmet queer who had to dress up and play army to be taken seriously supporter? Absolutely not. Fuck him, fuck his uniform, and fuck his purple hart.

It’s Purple Heart smart guy. Back to the bunker with you, your kind is just noise pollution.

ANALYSIS: Democrats Have A Colonel Vindman Problem​

ANALYSIS: Democrats have a Colonel Vindman problem
November 11, 2019 ~ By Byron York
House Democrats conducted their impeachment interviews in secret, but Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman still emerged as star of the show. Appearing at his Oct. 29 deposition in full dress uniform, the decorated Army officer, now a White House National Security Council Ukraine expert, was the first witness who had actually listened to the phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that is at the heart of the Democratic impeachment campaign. Even though lawmakers were forbidden to discuss his testimony in public, Vindman's leaked opening statement that "I did not think it was proper [for Trump] to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen" exploded on news reports. Vindman has not yet been scheduled to appear before the Democrats' public impeachment hearings. When that happens, he will undoubtedly again play a prominent role. But there will be a difference. The public now has a transcript of Vindman's deposition. And those who have taken the trouble to read the 340-page document will have a different picture of Vindman's testimony than the one presented in early media reports.
Yes, Vindman testified repeatedly that he "thought it was wrong" for Trump, speaking with Zelensky, to bring up the 2016 election and allegations of Ukraine-related corruption on the part of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. But the Vindman transcript also showed a witness whose testimony was filled with opinion, with impressions, who had little new to offer, who withheld important information from the committee, who was steeped in a bureaucracy that has often been hostile to the president, and whose lawyer, presumably with Vindman's approval, expressed unmistakable disdain, verging on contempt, for members of Congress who asked inconvenient questions. In short, Vindman's testimony was not the slam-dunk hit Democrats portrayed it to be.



Comment:
How many times has a President had his confidential phone calls put out in the public domain right after he took office? No wonder President Trump does not trust the State Department along with other agencies.
From the beginning, I've given Vindman the benefit of the doubt because of his military service. My opinion then was influenced by an article I read urging Republicans to lay off of him when he first came onto the scene. At this point, though, things just don't feel right. A Ukranian born man spending his time-sharing under the table advisement to Ukraine in order to handicap U.S. foreign policy he didn't like is a bridge too far. If we can spend two years accusing Trump of being a Russian again, I think Vindman is probably fair game. I don't care if you don't like the decisions of the President, they are the elected party in this equation. High-minded, arrogant bureaucrats are not supposed to be running this country.
Being removed from the NSC is the least of Vindman's worries. When he's done being a pawn for the Progressive Marxist Socialist Left and especially Adam Schiff, he's almost certainly going to bear scrutiny under the UCMJ and/or by the DOJ for his illegal leaking. What he shared with the whistle-blower was top secret information and Vindman has no special immunity to go outside of the chain of command with his complaints.
This guy needs to be nailed to the wall. Letting someone subvert the Office of the Presidency the way he did, including likely committing crimes, can not stand. For the sake of everyone's trust in our institutions, a message must be sent that this won't be tolerated.

So it's known, dirt bags fit in army uniforms to. He is just another government shit sack. Fuck him, fuck his uniform. All it is is a prop to people like him and Schiff.

Is it any wonder why people are disgusted by Trump supporters like yourself?! #ProudAndDeplorable

Trump supporter? No. Trump policy supporter? Mostly. Little gubmet queer who had to dress up and play army to be taken seriously supporter? Absolutely not. Fuck him, fuck his uniform, and fuck his purple hart.

It’s Purple Heart smart guy. Back to the bunker with you, your kind is just noise pollution.

View attachment 289492


Military Medals


Wonder if that's where John Kerry bought his to? Libtards are big on that. Buying medals to spruce up their uniforms.

Conservatards seem big on bashing military heroes.

 

[Coyote]

That’s fair, I’m at troll level thus far in this thread, but I took this thread as a bash on the guy in uniform thread...

I see.
Can't bear to see anyone in uniform questioned or doubted eh? That's quite a metamorphosis for the left just in the last decade or so when our military was seen as killer lackeys for the Bush and Cheney war machine.

We are seeing quite a few sudden reversals since the Obama years. I never thought I'd see the left defending the CIA AND the military but here we are (the few exceptions like Kerry and McCain notwithstanding).

Alex Vindman Is Living Proof That The Deep State Exists, And Is Corrupt
He's a puffed up company man, loyal to the "Interagency", and perfectly at peace with ignoring orders from the President if, in his judgement, those orders conflict with the interests of
the Interagency. There is deep state written all over this man.

I’m happy to come above board and discuss specifics though. Where do you want to take it?

You can start by detailing what it is specifically that you take issue with in Byron York's analysis of Vindman.

Actually...what's difficult to "bear" is the way you guys have ZERO problem with someone UNTIL they speak "truth to power" on Trump.

Then, of a sudden, out of nowhere - they are filth.

Trumpism is a cult.

 

[Ropey]

Coyote supports the cult of Islamism but not the cult of Westernism?

 

[Syriusly]

ANALYSIS: Democrats Have A Colonel Vindman Problem​

ANALYSIS: Democrats have a Colonel Vindman problem
November 11, 2019 ~ By Byron York
House Democrats conducted their impeachment interviews in secret, but Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman still emerged as star of the show. Appearing at his Oct. 29 deposition in full dress uniform, the decorated Army officer, now a White House National Security Council Ukraine expert, was the first witness who had actually listened to the phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that is at the heart of the Democratic impeachment campaign. Even though lawmakers were forbidden to discuss his testimony in public, Vindman's leaked opening statement that "I did not think it was proper [for Trump] to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen" exploded on news reports. Vindman has not yet been scheduled to appear before the Democrats' public impeachment hearings. When that happens, he will undoubtedly again play a prominent role. But there will be a difference. The public now has a transcript of Vindman's deposition. And those who have taken the trouble to read the 340-page document will have a different picture of Vindman's testimony than the one presented in early media reports.
Yes, Vindman testified repeatedly that he "thought it was wrong" for Trump, speaking with Zelensky, to bring up the 2016 election and allegations of Ukraine-related corruption on the part of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. But the Vindman transcript also showed a witness whose testimony was filled with opinion, with impressions, who had little new to offer, who withheld important information from the committee, who was steeped in a bureaucracy that has often been hostile to the president, and whose lawyer, presumably with Vindman's approval, expressed unmistakable disdain, verging on contempt, for members of Congress who asked inconvenient questions. In short, Vindman's testimony was not the slam-dunk hit Democrats portrayed it to be.



Comment:
How many times has a President had his confidential phone calls put out in the public domain right after he took office? No wonder President Trump does not trust the State Department along with other agencies.
From the beginning, I've given Vindman the benefit of the doubt because of his military service. My opinion then was influenced by an article I read urging Republicans to lay off of him when he first came onto the scene. At this point, though, things just don't feel right. A Ukranian born man spending his time-sharing under the table advisement to Ukraine in order to handicap U.S. foreign policy he didn't like is a bridge too far. If we can spend two years accusing Trump of being a Russian again, I think Vindman is probably fair game. I don't care if you don't like the decisions of the President, they are the elected party in this equation. High-minded, arrogant bureaucrats are not supposed to be running this country.
Being removed from the NSC is the least of Vindman's worries. When he's done being a pawn for the Progressive Marxist Socialist Left and especially Adam Schiff, he's almost certainly going to bear scrutiny under the UCMJ and/or by the DOJ for his illegal leaking. What he shared with the whistle-blower was top secret information and Vindman has no special immunity to go outside of the chain of command with his complaints.
This guy needs to be nailed to the wall. Letting someone subvert the Office of the Presidency the way he did, including likely committing crimes, can not stand. For the sake of everyone's trust in our institutions, a message must be sent that this won't be tolerated.

Wow- what complete and typical Republican bullshit

A Ukranian born man spending his time-sharing under the table advisement to Ukraine in order to handicap U.S. foreign policy he didn't like is a bridge too far.

Vindman's job was to work with the Ukrainians.
What U.S. foreign policy didn't Vindman like?

Are you saying that it was official U.S. policy to withhold Congressionally approved defense funds for Ukraine until Ukraine publicly announced it was investigating Trump's political rival?

There is no evidence that Vindman 'leaked' anything let alone 'illegally leaked anything.

The write of this article basically says Vindman didn't put loyalty to Trump ahead of loyalty to the U.S..

I know that the Republicans will trash this veteran who bled for America.
Won't be the first time that Republicans trash a veteran for the GOP political benefit.
Won't be the last time.

 

[Crixus]

So it's known, dirt bags fit in army uniforms to. He is just another government shit sack. Fuck him, fuck his uniform. All it is is a prop to people like him and Schiff.

Is it any wonder why people are disgusted by Trump supporters like yourself?! #ProudAndDeplorable

Trump supporter? No. Trump policy supporter? Mostly. Little gubmet queer who had to dress up and play army to be taken seriously supporter? Absolutely not. Fuck him, fuck his uniform, and fuck his purple hart.

It’s Purple Heart smart guy. Back to the bunker with you, your kind is just noise pollution.

So it's known, dirt bags fit in army uniforms to. He is just another government shit sack. Fuck him, fuck his uniform. All it is is a prop to people like him and Schiff.

Is it any wonder why people are disgusted by Trump supporters like yourself?! #ProudAndDeplorable

Trump supporter? No. Trump policy supporter? Mostly. Little gubmet queer who had to dress up and play army to be taken seriously supporter? Absolutely not. Fuck him, fuck his uniform, and fuck his purple hart.

It’s Purple Heart smart guy. Back to the bunker with you, your kind is just noise pollution.

View attachment 289492


Military Medals


Wonder if that's where John Kerry bought his to? Libtards are big on that. Buying medals to spruce up their uniforms.

Conservatards seem big on bashing military heroes.

Only fake ones.