Trump's Explanation of Why He Fired Yevgeny (Eugene) Vindman

[colfax_m]

Trump violated the law.

18 U.S. Code § 1513 - Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant

Vindman served at the pleasure of the President. Do you know what that means?

That means Trump can fire him because he doesn't like his tie, moron.

He can't fire in in retaliation for testifying, which is what he did. And he really can't fire someone because he doesn't like his tie. BFOQ. Know what that means?

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

no he wasn't. you've been fooled. he took an oath to obey the president. not leak information without going to the chain of command.

Where did anyone show he leaked anything?

 

[WEATHER53]

Nothing like me the underlings disobeying and backstabbing the boss then wailing about being held responsible.
Libs dislike personal responsibility So Much that they operate like it does not exist

because they have no idea how businesses function.

They don’t believe government is business. They think it’s a perpetual social bandaid

 

[Siete]

Vindman served at the pleasure of the President. Do you know what that means?

That means Trump can fire him because he doesn't like his tie, moron.

He can't fire in in retaliation for testifying, which is what he did. And he really can't fire someone because he doesn't like his tie. BFOQ. Know what that means?

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

LIes.

His job was to serve the President, not try to make foreign policy.

making foreign policy is the president's job. the dude thought he was president. Impersonating an officer.

know foreign policy - first things first


this aint Kansas Dorothy, errrrrrr Donnie.

 

[OldLady]

Maybe you should supply some "information sources" backing up those accusations.

I get it from a bunch of sources. Try clicking on a linked post in Twitter or Facebook and actually read about the subject instead of taking CNN's word for everything.

Twitter and Facebook aren't news sources, and you are apparently just taking repeated gossip and unfounded accusations as "evidence." Because there has never been any support whatsoever for your allegations. Barbara whatsherface brought it up as conjecture and it flew around like gospel, but there is no evidence whatever to support it.
And I don't watch CNN.

The linked sources that are sometimes on Twitter and Facebook posts can be revealing. Just reading a post won't tell you much, but they at times contain links to actual news sources. If you listen to any cable news it won't give you the whole story.....only part of it....

....point being....i'm not making this shit up.

Then let's see a valid link to a verifiable source. Since you've seen so many. Please.

Do your own homework, lady.

I post this stuff with links daily.

You've never posted a link on this because one doesn't exist.
You made the allegation. You back it up. I've tried looking up sources and all I ever got was the unsupported conjecture by that Barbara whoemever.

 

[Polishprince]

Nothing like the underlings disobeying and backstabbing the boss then wailing about being held responsible.
Libs dislike personal responsibility So Much that they operate like it does not exist

The VIndmans were basically "working" at "jobs" similar to the old Jobs Bank positions at the major unionized auto makers.

They came to the job site,gossiped, did crossword puzzles and sudoku. Participated in office blood drives, football polls, United Way campaigns.

But as far as the actual work of the office? They've been kept totally out of the loop. It should be good for the Vindman guys to be working somewhere they might be able to contribute to.

 

[Polishprince]

Vindman served at the pleasure of the President. Do you know what that means?

That means Trump can fire him because he doesn't like his tie, moron.

He can't fire in in retaliation for testifying, which is what he did. And he really can't fire someone because he doesn't like his tie. BFOQ. Know what that means?

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

no he wasn't. you've been fooled. he took an oath to obey the president. not leak information without going to the chain of command.

Where did anyone show he leaked anything?

President Trump made that determination, and I'm sure that it was based upon solid proof.

The idea is to give only the suspected individual, Vindman, a piece of fake information, and see if that fake information ends up in the Washington Post or on CNN.

 

[Siete]

piss across Trumps path and youre fired - the list is long and growing.

 

[Polishprince]

piss across Trumps path and youre fired - the list is long and growing.

No one is "fired", just reassigned where they can be useful.

President Trump doesn't keep those advisors he would never use around.

 

[colfax_m]

He can't fire in in retaliation for testifying, which is what he did. And he really can't fire someone because he doesn't like his tie. BFOQ. Know what that means?

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

no he wasn't. you've been fooled. he took an oath to obey the president. not leak information without going to the chain of command.

Where did anyone show he leaked anything?

President Trump made that determination, and I'm sure that it was based upon solid proof.

The idea is to give only the suspected individual, Vindman, a piece of fake information, and see if that fake information ends up in the Washington Post or on CNN.

I’m not sure. If there were proof, I wager we’d know.

 

[Polishprince]

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

no he wasn't. you've been fooled. he took an oath to obey the president. not leak information without going to the chain of command.

Where did anyone show he leaked anything?

President Trump made that determination, and I'm sure that it was based upon solid proof.

The idea is to give only the suspected individual, Vindman, a piece of fake information, and see if that fake information ends up in the Washington Post or on CNN.

I’m not sure. If there were proof, I wager we’d know.

I think we know that there is proof that satisfies President Trump.

But as far as the actual Fake Information that Vindman was given and CNN was caught with, that we will not know. In order to protect the operatives that dished it out to VIndman. If VIndman was told exactly how he was caught, he would know who caught him, and that person's life would be in danger.

 

[jc456]

Vindman served at the pleasure of the President. Do you know what that means?

That means Trump can fire him because he doesn't like his tie, moron.

He can't fire in in retaliation for testifying, which is what he did. And he really can't fire someone because he doesn't like his tie. BFOQ. Know what that means?

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

no he wasn't. you've been fooled. he took an oath to obey the president. not leak information without going to the chain of command.

Where did anyone show he leaked anything?

Vindman Just Admitted To Leaking To The Anti-Trump Whistleblower

 

[jc456]

He can't fire in in retaliation for testifying, which is what he did. And he really can't fire someone because he doesn't like his tie. BFOQ. Know what that means?

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

LIes.

His job was to serve the President, not try to make foreign policy.

making foreign policy is the president's job. the dude thought he was president. Impersonating an officer.

know foreign policy - first things first


this aint Kansas Dorothy, errrrrrr Donnie.

what's your point?

 

[colfax_m]

He can't fire in in retaliation for testifying, which is what he did. And he really can't fire someone because he doesn't like his tie. BFOQ. Know what that means?

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

no he wasn't. you've been fooled. he took an oath to obey the president. not leak information without going to the chain of command.

Where did anyone show he leaked anything?

Vindman Just Admitted To Leaking To The Anti-Trump Whistleblower

It’s not a leak if he discussed it with people who had security clearance and a reason to know. That’s not what you have here.

 

[jc456]

Vindman is the source for the Whistleblower and Vindman was caught committing perjury during testimony......

Can you quit with that falsehood, please?

I never started.
Maybe you should rethink your information sources.

Maybe you should supply some "information sources" backing up those accusations.

I get it from a bunch of sources. Try clicking on a linked post in Twitter or Facebook and actually read about the subject instead of taking CNN's word for everything.

Twitter and Facebook aren't news sources, and you are apparently just taking repeated gossip and unfounded accusations as "evidence." Because there has never been any support whatsoever for your allegations. Barbara whatsherface brought it up as conjecture and it flew around like gospel, but there is no evidence whatever to support it.
And I don't watch CNN.

but news sources advertise their stories there. go look.

 

[mudwhistle]

I get it from a bunch of sources. Try clicking on a linked post in Twitter or Facebook and actually read about the subject instead of taking CNN's word for everything.

Twitter and Facebook aren't news sources, and you are apparently just taking repeated gossip and unfounded accusations as "evidence." Because there has never been any support whatsoever for your allegations. Barbara whatsherface brought it up as conjecture and it flew around like gospel, but there is no evidence whatever to support it.
And I don't watch CNN.

The linked sources that are sometimes on Twitter and Facebook posts can be revealing. Just reading a post won't tell you much, but they at times contain links to actual news sources. If you listen to any cable news it won't give you the whole story.....only part of it....

....point being....i'm not making this shit up.

Then let's see a valid link to a verifiable source. Since you've seen so many. Please.

Do your own homework, lady.

I post this stuff with links daily.

You've never posted a link on this because one doesn't exist.
You made the allegation. You back it up. I've tried looking up sources and all I ever got was the unsupported conjecture by that Barbara whoemever.

Frankly I don't have to prove anything to you.
I learned a long time ago arguing with liberals is a waste of time, as is showing them the facts. They always invent excuses not to believe it.

And personally, you can call me a liar till you're blue in the face and it's no sweat off of my balls. What you think about me doesn't even register.

 

[jc456]

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

no he wasn't. you've been fooled. he took an oath to obey the president. not leak information without going to the chain of command.

Where did anyone show he leaked anything?

Vindman Just Admitted To Leaking To The Anti-Trump Whistleblower

It’s not a leak if he discussed it with people who had security clearance and a reason to know. That’s not what you have here.

Vindman Just Admitted To Leaking To The Anti-Trump Whistleblower

you know the whistleblower has clearance? how?

 

[WEATHER53]

why not? if the dude isn't doing his job, he's fired. even though he was just reassigned and not fired. you're lost.

The guy was doing his job.

LIes.

His job was to serve the President, not try to make foreign policy.

making foreign policy is the president's job. the dude thought he was president. Impersonating an officer.

know foreign policy - first things first


this aint Kansas Dorothy, errrrrrr Donnie.

what's your point?

Points are Facts. They don’t have any

 

[OldLady]

Can you quit with that falsehood, please?

I never started.
Maybe you should rethink your information sources.

Maybe you should supply some "information sources" backing up those accusations.

I get it from a bunch of sources. Try clicking on a linked post in Twitter or Facebook and actually read about the subject instead of taking CNN's word for everything.

Twitter and Facebook aren't news sources, and you are apparently just taking repeated gossip and unfounded accusations as "evidence." Because there has never been any support whatsoever for your allegations. Barbara whatsherface brought it up as conjecture and it flew around like gospel, but there is no evidence whatever to support it.
And I don't watch CNN.

but news sources advertise their stories there. go look.

Not my job.

 

[jc456]

I never started.
Maybe you should rethink your information sources.

Maybe you should supply some "information sources" backing up those accusations.

I get it from a bunch of sources. Try clicking on a linked post in Twitter or Facebook and actually read about the subject instead of taking CNN's word for everything.

Twitter and Facebook aren't news sources, and you are apparently just taking repeated gossip and unfounded accusations as "evidence." Because there has never been any support whatsoever for your allegations. Barbara whatsherface brought it up as conjecture and it flew around like gospel, but there is no evidence whatever to support it.
And I don't watch CNN.

but news sources advertise their stories there. go look.

Not my job.

neither is posting in here. yet here you are. misinformed because you're lazy.

 

[OldLady]

Twitter and Facebook aren't news sources, and you are apparently just taking repeated gossip and unfounded accusations as "evidence." Because there has never been any support whatsoever for your allegations. Barbara whatsherface brought it up as conjecture and it flew around like gospel, but there is no evidence whatever to support it.
And I don't watch CNN.

The linked sources that are sometimes on Twitter and Facebook posts can be revealing. Just reading a post won't tell you much, but they at times contain links to actual news sources. If you listen to any cable news it won't give you the whole story.....only part of it....

....point being....i'm not making this shit up.

Then let's see a valid link to a verifiable source. Since you've seen so many. Please.

Do your own homework, lady.

I post this stuff with links daily.

You've never posted a link on this because one doesn't exist.
You made the allegation. You back it up. I've tried looking up sources and all I ever got was the unsupported conjecture by that Barbara whoemever.

Frankly I don't have to prove anything to you.
I learned a long time ago arguing with liberals is a waste of time, as is showing them the facts. They always invent excuses not to believe it.

And personally, you can call me a liar till you're blue in the face and it's no sweat off of my balls. What you think about me doesn't even register.

You've sure got a lot of excuses. If I were making allegations like that I'd have some evidence behind me. You just lie.