Trump didn't serve. Col Vindmann told the truth to Congress.
Rush Limbaugh has been the fence for every Trump lie.
Looks like the infamous Vindman will be doing the duffle bag drag
- Thread starter tyroneweaver
- Start date
Trump didn't serve. Col Vindmann told the truth to Congress.
Rush Limbaugh has been the fence for every Trump lie.
Congress is a part of the chain of command.
Rush Limbaugh has not told the truth in some time. He is Trump's sock puppet.
No. In this Great Nation we don't have Lieutenant Colonels dictating foreign policy, if that is what you are looking for, you might want to go find a Banana Republic.
Obtaining warrants to illegally spy on the President with the use of a forged documents is "specified in the Constitution"?It was a coup. Just because thousands of people haven't been killed doesn't mean it wasn't one.Coup, sh-mew. Here's examples of coup. Congo Crisis - Wikipedia 100,000 believed killed. 1960 Ethiopian coup d'état attempt - WikipediaThe same DOJ that tried to stage a coup against Trump?
TDS morons like you are crazy.
300 killed, including most of the conspirators. 1963 Togolese coup d'état - Wikipedia They took over government buildings, arrested most of the cabinet, and assassinated Togo's first president, Sylvanus Olympio outside the American embassy in Lomé. 1963 Dahomeyan coup d'état - Wikipedia On October 28 Chief of Staff of the 800-man Dahomeyan Army Christophe Soglo took control of the country[16] to prevent a civil war. He dismissed the cabinet, dissolved the Assembly, suspended the constitution and banned any type of demonstrations.[19] After having Maga sign his resignation the same day. In late November, it began prosecuting members of the cabinet, such as the Minister of National Economy and the Finance Minister for misusing public funds.[19] Maga was soon to find himself in jail too. Ramadan Revolution - Wikipedia the February 1963 coup d'état in Iraq, was a military coup by the Ba'ath Party's Iraqi-wing which overthrew the Prime Minister of Iraq, Abd al-Karim Qasim in 1963. The most powerful leader of the new government was the secretary general of the Iraqi Ba'ath Party, Ali Salih al-Sa'di, who controlled the National Guard militia and organized a massacre of hundreds—if not thousands—of suspected communists and other dissidents following the coup.[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1965_Algerian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat Around 1:30am, Tahar Zbiri, Said Abid, and colonel Abbes approached Villa Joly and were let in by the replacement guards at the entrance. Tahar Zbiri knocked on Ben Bella's door and explained to Ben Bella that he was no longer the president. The three military officers allowed Ben Bella to get dressed and then took him to an undisclosed location where he was placed under house arrest.
You get the point. All you little drama queens crying "Coup, Coup, Coup" are just so full of sh#t. This was no coup. It was an investigation of the illegal activities for political gain by the now "Impeached President of the United States, per the Constitution. The House of Representatives proved their case. We all know Donny's guilt. He just wasn't removed, mainly because spineless Republican Senators thought the election in 9 months was the place for the people speak on the matter, and it would allow them to hold on to power until election day. I am proud, the House exposed Donny's bullsh#t, and am proud of the whistle blower and all those that testified in the House as great American Patriots. I will support whatever Democrat is on the ticket in November to replace the crooked SOB at that time.
It is not a coup. It is specified in the Constitution.
Are you sure?
(Impeachment is specified in the Constitution. Also the warrants on Carter Page was obtained after Page left the campaign Maybe you can tell us how a campaign can be spied on when the subject is no longer a part of the campaign.
The DOJ has already turned down a opportunity to prosecute Comey because the evidence was not there. Flynn was being investigated for more serious charges related to his lobbying activities. Prosecutors were giving him a break by allowing him to plead guilty to lesser charges.
Vindman was part of the failed bloodless coup d'etat that they began plotting before Trump was even sworn in.
The Electorate thought he was the RIGHT President, the Swamp disagreed and tried to take matters OUT of OUR hands, but failed miserably, then Crazy Nancy committed a felony before the entire nation and proved she is completely out of her mind, which explains this ridiculous impeachment.
Note that in 2012, when Obama won an undeserved term against the loser Benedict Romney -- who almost seemed to be working for Obama himself -- Americans' satisfaction with their lives was a mere 78%. In 1992 %when Papa Bush managed to lose to BJ Clinton, satisfaction was
And now? 90%! Highest level ever recorded by Gallup.
On one hand, the economy is at levels never before seen; Americans say they're doing better than last year at the highest rate ever recorded; and furthermore they expect to do better next year at the highest rate since the Summer of Star Wars; and American's satisfaction with their lives is the highest level ever recorded.
But, on the other hand: Trump's TWEETS.
This is what they got. This is what all their hopes are riding on.
Sure you're making money, America is at peace for the first time in decades, and you think the economy is in great shape.
On the other hand: Trump's Tweets.
Easy call!
Ace of Spades HQ
There was no coup.
The electorate thought he was the least worst of the two candidates. 25% of the electorate was voting against the other candidate. trump is a part of the new swamp. He has appointed a number of lobbyists to run agencies they lobbied. The EPA has been taken over by the coal ind8ustry. Worth noting that the people who think this country is going in the wrong direction is still a strong majority.
The economy started growing under Obama. Even by your own chart, satisfaction under Obama was around 85% when he left office. Around 5% or less is not a strong increase.
Clearly Democrats have issues to go after Trump on. Voters disagree with Trump on nearly every issue. Healthcare, global warming, the environment, border security and immigration policy to name a few.
Ace of Spades has Spades in his head.
What utter hogwash. I like the way my investments have performed also, but doesn't mean he didn't illegally try to use money assigned by both houses of congress to force Ukraine to make a public statement of investigation to benefit his election campaign.I doubt it.
Gallup: 59% of Americans say they are better off financially than they were a year ago, the highest level in the history of Gallup polling.
Gallup has never recorded this level in over 40 years - even the dot com boom was 58%.
This is how Trump wins reelection in November.
He took 30 states last time, could easily take 35 this time.
ALEXANDER VINDMAN CONDEMNED HIMSELF IN HIS IMPEACHMENT TESTIMONY.
Vindman was unreliable and had questionable judgment, according to his own outgoing superior, Tim Morrison, the National Security Council’s senior director for European affairs.
In fact, Morrison viewed Vindman as so untrustworthy that he opted to exclude him from his conversations with William Taylor, the senior US diplomat in Ukraine.
Vindman had an “unfortunate habit,” Morrison thought, of defying the sprawling executive branch’s carefully delineated chain of command. Vindman’s testimony vindicates Morrison’s dripping disdain for his former subordinate.
The nation was put through this imbroglio because Vindman opted to work in tandem with a Deep State whistleblower to jump-start impeachment proceedings over a disagreement with a phone call’s ethics.
Suffice it to say, this is not how our constitutional republic is intended to operate.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the US Constitution is remarkably straightforward:
“The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America.”
Leftists may invariably decry constitutional law’s “unitary executive theory,” but as Attorney General William Barr noted last Friday, the notion that the president of the United States, and only the president of the United States, is responsible for carrying out “the executive power” of which Article II speaks is not a mere “theory.”
It is, as Barr said, a “description of what the Framers unquestionably did in Article II.”
When anyone else in the executive branch — be it Deep State, Shallow State or anywhere in between — attempts to undermine and thwart the president’s executive power, such action is not merely insubordinate or morally problematic. It is outright unconstitutional.
The executive power incontrovertibly includes within its ambit all “residual” foreign-affairs powers, meaning all foreign-affairs powers not legislatively vested in Congress in Article I, Section 8.
It is appropriate for top-level national security advisers to offer substantive opinions to the president. But Vindman has testified that he never even directly communicated with Trump.
Vindman actually attempted to deliberately thwart or undermine the duly enacted president’s foreign policy agenda, he was attempting to unconstitutionally carry out the executive power that the Constitution of the United States vests in the president of the United States alone.
Executive power, especially in the areas of foreign policy and national security, flows from the very person of the president. A lieutenant colonel has no right to interfere with the president’s discretion or attempt to undermine the president’s authority over policy disagreements — which is what the impeachment allegations amount to.
Now this piece of insubordinate crap is rightfully dismissed from his perch on the National Security Council.
Vindman followed the rules and spoke the truth, as did Sondland and the others.
Let me know when that article 32 session on charges of insubordination starts.
And Sondland testified that when he spoke to Trump, Trump told him no quid pro quo's. Out of all the witnesses, he's the only one that talked with Trump directly.
This debate is back and forth, back and forth. It reminds me of an old George Carling joke: When two people are in an elevator and one of them farts, they both know who did it.
We all read the transcript. We all know what Trump said, so when you on the left keep repeating the lies, it's not going to make us believe them.
Trump never threatened aid to Ukraine.
Zelensky stated he felt no pressure from President Trump.
Biden was not Trump's rival. It was almost a year before their nominee would be selected.
The aid was released, two weeks before the deadline.
Trump got nothing in return, therefore, no quid pro quo.
Quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents. They are not against the law.
If you honestly read the transcript, it proves that Trump was pressuring Ukraine to open a phony investigation. We also have Giuliani's attempts to do the same and now trying to palm off Russian misinformation.
Trump did threaten to withhold aid. Giuliani's effort was ongoing well before the call.
Zelensky is not going to get involved in this.
Biden is running for the same office Trump is.
The aid was released once it became public knowledge.
Trump wanted a phony investigation but the sordid affair became public. Even Mulvaney confirms the quid pro quo.
It is abuse of power as pressuring a foreign country to investigate a political rival is not a part of any legitimate foreign policy.
Witnesses with no first hand information, even Kangaroos don't do that.What utter hogwash. I like the way my investments have performed also, but doesn't mean he didn't illegally try to use money assigned by both houses of congress to force Ukraine to make a public statement of investigation to benefit his election campaign.I doubt it.
Gallup: 59% of Americans say they are better off financially than they were a year ago, the highest level in the history of Gallup polling.
Gallup has never recorded this level in over 40 years - even the dot com boom was 58%.
This is how Trump wins reelection in November.
He took 30 states last time, could easily take 35 this time.
ALEXANDER VINDMAN CONDEMNED HIMSELF IN HIS IMPEACHMENT TESTIMONY.
Vindman was unreliable and had questionable judgment, according to his own outgoing superior, Tim Morrison, the National Security Council’s senior director for European affairs.
In fact, Morrison viewed Vindman as so untrustworthy that he opted to exclude him from his conversations with William Taylor, the senior US diplomat in Ukraine.
Vindman had an “unfortunate habit,” Morrison thought, of defying the sprawling executive branch’s carefully delineated chain of command. Vindman’s testimony vindicates Morrison’s dripping disdain for his former subordinate.
The nation was put through this imbroglio because Vindman opted to work in tandem with a Deep State whistleblower to jump-start impeachment proceedings over a disagreement with a phone call’s ethics.
Suffice it to say, this is not how our constitutional republic is intended to operate.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the US Constitution is remarkably straightforward:
“The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America.”
Leftists may invariably decry constitutional law’s “unitary executive theory,” but as Attorney General William Barr noted last Friday, the notion that the president of the United States, and only the president of the United States, is responsible for carrying out “the executive power” of which Article II speaks is not a mere “theory.”
It is, as Barr said, a “description of what the Framers unquestionably did in Article II.”
When anyone else in the executive branch — be it Deep State, Shallow State or anywhere in between — attempts to undermine and thwart the president’s executive power, such action is not merely insubordinate or morally problematic. It is outright unconstitutional.
The executive power incontrovertibly includes within its ambit all “residual” foreign-affairs powers, meaning all foreign-affairs powers not legislatively vested in Congress in Article I, Section 8.
It is appropriate for top-level national security advisers to offer substantive opinions to the president. But Vindman has testified that he never even directly communicated with Trump.
Vindman actually attempted to deliberately thwart or undermine the duly enacted president’s foreign policy agenda, he was attempting to unconstitutionally carry out the executive power that the Constitution of the United States vests in the president of the United States alone.
Executive power, especially in the areas of foreign policy and national security, flows from the very person of the president. A lieutenant colonel has no right to interfere with the president’s discretion or attempt to undermine the president’s authority over policy disagreements — which is what the impeachment allegations amount to.
Now this piece of insubordinate crap is rightfully dismissed from his perch on the National Security Council.
Vindman followed the rules and spoke the truth, as did Sondland and the others.
Let me know when that article 32 session on charges of insubordination starts.
And Sondland testified that when he spoke to Trump, Trump told him no quid pro quo's. Out of all the witnesses, he's the only one that talked with Trump directly. ..
It was all a bid farce by a Mad House Drunk With Arrogated Power. Now so shamefully repudiated that Crazy Nancy committed a felony, deliberately, in full view of the Nation.
That's where the fortune telling came into the impeachment. They couldn't say they impeached Trump for something that Obama did, and Joe on video laughing about it. So they made up this little story that Biden was Trump's rival, even though any honest person knows that wasn't true. We won't know for a couple of months who Trump will be facing. And if Biden is not chosen, I wonder if the Democrat leadership will offer Trump a public apology for impeaching him on something that never existed, such as Biden being his rival?
Any honest person knows that Biden was seen by Trump as his chief political rival. E-mails that show Trump's state of mind are being withheld by Trump's administration. The question is what is he hiding? If they were exculpatory, they would have been made public.
OANN is propaganda. Nothing more.
Know any other good jokes?
SmokeALib
Platinum Member
The Truth will always be propaganda to the leftist.
Ray From Cleveland
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2015
- 97,215
- 37,449
- 2,290
Witnesses with no first hand information, even Kangaroos don't do that.What utter hogwash. I like the way my investments have performed also, but doesn't mean he didn't illegally try to use money assigned by both houses of congress to force Ukraine to make a public statement of investigation to benefit his election campaign.I doubt it.
Gallup: 59% of Americans say they are better off financially than they were a year ago, the highest level in the history of Gallup polling.
Gallup has never recorded this level in over 40 years - even the dot com boom was 58%.
This is how Trump wins reelection in November.
He took 30 states last time, could easily take 35 this time.
ALEXANDER VINDMAN CONDEMNED HIMSELF IN HIS IMPEACHMENT TESTIMONY.
Vindman was unreliable and had questionable judgment, according to his own outgoing superior, Tim Morrison, the National Security Council’s senior director for European affairs.
In fact, Morrison viewed Vindman as so untrustworthy that he opted to exclude him from his conversations with William Taylor, the senior US diplomat in Ukraine.
Vindman had an “unfortunate habit,” Morrison thought, of defying the sprawling executive branch’s carefully delineated chain of command. Vindman’s testimony vindicates Morrison’s dripping disdain for his former subordinate.
The nation was put through this imbroglio because Vindman opted to work in tandem with a Deep State whistleblower to jump-start impeachment proceedings over a disagreement with a phone call’s ethics.
Suffice it to say, this is not how our constitutional republic is intended to operate.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the US Constitution is remarkably straightforward:
“The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America.”
Leftists may invariably decry constitutional law’s “unitary executive theory,” but as Attorney General William Barr noted last Friday, the notion that the president of the United States, and only the president of the United States, is responsible for carrying out “the executive power” of which Article II speaks is not a mere “theory.”
It is, as Barr said, a “description of what the Framers unquestionably did in Article II.”
When anyone else in the executive branch — be it Deep State, Shallow State or anywhere in between — attempts to undermine and thwart the president’s executive power, such action is not merely insubordinate or morally problematic. It is outright unconstitutional.
The executive power incontrovertibly includes within its ambit all “residual” foreign-affairs powers, meaning all foreign-affairs powers not legislatively vested in Congress in Article I, Section 8.
It is appropriate for top-level national security advisers to offer substantive opinions to the president. But Vindman has testified that he never even directly communicated with Trump.
Vindman actually attempted to deliberately thwart or undermine the duly enacted president’s foreign policy agenda, he was attempting to unconstitutionally carry out the executive power that the Constitution of the United States vests in the president of the United States alone.
Executive power, especially in the areas of foreign policy and national security, flows from the very person of the president. A lieutenant colonel has no right to interfere with the president’s discretion or attempt to undermine the president’s authority over policy disagreements — which is what the impeachment allegations amount to.
Now this piece of insubordinate crap is rightfully dismissed from his perch on the National Security Council.
Vindman followed the rules and spoke the truth, as did Sondland and the others.
Let me know when that article 32 session on charges of insubordination starts.
And Sondland testified that when he spoke to Trump, Trump told him no quid pro quo's. Out of all the witnesses, he's the only one that talked with Trump directly. ..
It was all a bid farce by a Mad House Drunk With Arrogated Power. Now so shamefully repudiated that Crazy Nancy committed a felony, deliberately, in full view of the Nation.
That's where the fortune telling came into the impeachment. They couldn't say they impeached Trump for something that Obama did, and Joe on video laughing about it. So they made up this little story that Biden was Trump's rival, even though any honest person knows that wasn't true. We won't know for a couple of months who Trump will be facing. And if Biden is not chosen, I wonder if the Democrat leadership will offer Trump a public apology for impeaching him on something that never existed, such as Biden being his rival?
Any honest person knows that Biden was seen by Trump as his chief political rival. E-mails that show Trump's state of mind are being withheld by Trump's administration. The question is what is he hiding? If they were exculpatory, they would have been made public.
Trump had his emails bleach bitted.
How does one predict his rival almost a year before the nomination? Maybe Trump can tell me the lotto numbers next draw?
Now that Biden is likely not Trump's rival, when are the Democrats going to offer a public apology to Trump for impeaching him on false claims since Biden is nearly out of the race?
Ray From Cleveland
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2015
- 97,215
- 37,449
- 2,290
Which is exactly why the Democrats charged Trump with this phony impeachment.
The aid was released well ahead of schedule. Did the Thought Police tell you what Trump was thinking when he released the aid?
No, what he said is that he was misconstrued in his words. More lying MSM.
Yet it was okay when Biden actually did it.
- Nov 10, 2019
- 52,739
- 33,512
- 2,490
- Moderator
- #675
They know Bee. They just don't want to admit, specifically because they do know, and that would mean they are just as corruptly pursuing their own purposes as their corrupt leader.What utter hogwash. I like the way my investments have performed also, but doesn't mean he didn't illegally try to use money assigned by both houses of congress to force Ukraine to make a public statement of investigation to benefit his election campaign.I doubt it.
Gallup: 59% of Americans say they are better off financially than they were a year ago, the highest level in the history of Gallup polling.
Gallup has never recorded this level in over 40 years - even the dot com boom was 58%.
This is how Trump wins reelection in November.
He took 30 states last time, could easily take 35 this time.
ALEXANDER VINDMAN CONDEMNED HIMSELF IN HIS IMPEACHMENT TESTIMONY.
Vindman was unreliable and had questionable judgment, according to his own outgoing superior, Tim Morrison, the National Security Council’s senior director for European affairs.
In fact, Morrison viewed Vindman as so untrustworthy that he opted to exclude him from his conversations with William Taylor, the senior US diplomat in Ukraine.
Vindman had an “unfortunate habit,” Morrison thought, of defying the sprawling executive branch’s carefully delineated chain of command. Vindman’s testimony vindicates Morrison’s dripping disdain for his former subordinate.
The nation was put through this imbroglio because Vindman opted to work in tandem with a Deep State whistleblower to jump-start impeachment proceedings over a disagreement with a phone call’s ethics.
Suffice it to say, this is not how our constitutional republic is intended to operate.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the US Constitution is remarkably straightforward:
“The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America.”
Leftists may invariably decry constitutional law’s “unitary executive theory,” but as Attorney General William Barr noted last Friday, the notion that the president of the United States, and only the president of the United States, is responsible for carrying out “the executive power” of which Article II speaks is not a mere “theory.”
It is, as Barr said, a “description of what the Framers unquestionably did in Article II.”
When anyone else in the executive branch — be it Deep State, Shallow State or anywhere in between — attempts to undermine and thwart the president’s executive power, such action is not merely insubordinate or morally problematic. It is outright unconstitutional.
The executive power incontrovertibly includes within its ambit all “residual” foreign-affairs powers, meaning all foreign-affairs powers not legislatively vested in Congress in Article I, Section 8.
It is appropriate for top-level national security advisers to offer substantive opinions to the president. But Vindman has testified that he never even directly communicated with Trump.
Vindman actually attempted to deliberately thwart or undermine the duly enacted president’s foreign policy agenda, he was attempting to unconstitutionally carry out the executive power that the Constitution of the United States vests in the president of the United States alone.
Executive power, especially in the areas of foreign policy and national security, flows from the very person of the president. A lieutenant colonel has no right to interfere with the president’s discretion or attempt to undermine the president’s authority over policy disagreements — which is what the impeachment allegations amount to.
Now this piece of insubordinate crap is rightfully dismissed from his perch on the National Security Council.
Vindman followed the rules and spoke the truth, as did Sondland and the others.
Let me know when that article 32 session on charges of insubordination starts.
And Sondland testified that when he spoke to Trump, Trump told him no quid pro quo's. Out of all the witnesses, he's the only one that talked with Trump directly.
This debate is back and forth, back and forth. It reminds me of an old George Carling joke: When two people are in an elevator and one of them farts, they both know who did it.
We all read the transcript. We all know what Trump said, so when you on the left keep repeating the lies, it's not going to make us believe them.
Trump never threatened aid to Ukraine.
Zelensky stated he felt no pressure from President Trump.
Biden was not Trump's rival. It was almost a year before their nominee would be selected.
The aid was released, two weeks before the deadline.
Trump got nothing in return, therefore, no quid pro quo.
Quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents. They are not against the law.
If you honestly read the transcript, it proves that Trump was pressuring Ukraine to open a phony investigation. We also have Giuliani's attempts to do the same and now trying to palm off Russian misinformation.
Trump did threaten to withhold aid. Giuliani's effort was ongoing well before the call.
Zelensky is not going to get involved in this.
Biden is running for the same office Trump is.
The aid was released once it became public knowledge.
Trump wanted a phony investigation but the sordid affair became public. Even Mulvaney confirms the quid pro quo.
It is abuse of power as pressuring a foreign country to investigate a political rival is not a part of any legitimate foreign policy.
- Nov 10, 2019
- 52,739
- 33,512
- 2,490
- Moderator
- #676
He was his chief rival at the time. You know it, just as Trump knew it. You are a pain in the ass, but you ain't dumb. You are a strategy guy. OK. The strategy worked, deny, obscure, deny, point fingers somewhere else, deny, etc. Senator Alexander, thought it best to let it be resolved by the next election, but at least he acknowledge the wrongdoing. I guess you can do that when you are retiring. I still like the man. Been voting for Lamar since 1972. I knew what he thought of the Presidents actions. I have known this was how he would probably go since his letter of 9, December.
His career is hardly over. What we have is rumor and innuendo.. Col Vindman has proven to be a excellent soldier who has been a asset to the military and our country. Trump is a yellow dog coward. Interesting all of this comes out after he testifies. The question is whether this is a coordinated effort to discredit Col Vindmann. Those fellow rangers need to be court-martialed and drummed out of the service.
Chain of command is so much bullshit. You are just parroting Trump. These are the facts.
"It’s also true that Morrison said that Vindman did not follow the chain of command when Vindman reported his concerns about Trump’s July 25 call with Zelensky to lawyers at the NSC instead of Morrison. Morrison said he would have preferred that Vindman came to him first, but it was not unusual for him not to do so because of the way things worked under Hill, who was Vindman’s supervisor before Morrison.
Morrison had only been Vindman’s supervisor for a little more than a week at the time the call between the presidents took place.
“My predecessor had a different style for managing her staff than I do,” Morrison said during his private testimony in October. “She did not have the same view of how reporting through the chain of command should work.”
Fact-Checking Trump's Defense for Removing Vindman
Whistleblowers should be protected and he clearly is a whistleblower. Trump is retaliating because he testified before Congress as he clearly should have given he took a oath to defend the Constitution. Trump only wants yes men and people who will cover up his criminal conduct. Trump is a terrorist pure and simple.
They know Bee. They just don't want to admit, specifically because they do know, and that would mean they are just as corruptly pursuing their own purposes as their corrupt leader.What utter hogwash. I like the way my investments have performed also, but doesn't mean he didn't illegally try to use money assigned by both houses of congress to force Ukraine to make a public statement of investigation to benefit his election campaign.I doubt it.
Gallup: 59% of Americans say they are better off financially than they were a year ago, the highest level in the history of Gallup polling.
Gallup has never recorded this level in over 40 years - even the dot com boom was 58%.
This is how Trump wins reelection in November.
He took 30 states last time, could easily take 35 this time.
ALEXANDER VINDMAN CONDEMNED HIMSELF IN HIS IMPEACHMENT TESTIMONY.
Vindman was unreliable and had questionable judgment, according to his own outgoing superior, Tim Morrison, the National Security Council’s senior director for European affairs.
In fact, Morrison viewed Vindman as so untrustworthy that he opted to exclude him from his conversations with William Taylor, the senior US diplomat in Ukraine.
Vindman had an “unfortunate habit,” Morrison thought, of defying the sprawling executive branch’s carefully delineated chain of command. Vindman’s testimony vindicates Morrison’s dripping disdain for his former subordinate.
The nation was put through this imbroglio because Vindman opted to work in tandem with a Deep State whistleblower to jump-start impeachment proceedings over a disagreement with a phone call’s ethics.
Suffice it to say, this is not how our constitutional republic is intended to operate.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the US Constitution is remarkably straightforward:
“The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America.”
Leftists may invariably decry constitutional law’s “unitary executive theory,” but as Attorney General William Barr noted last Friday, the notion that the president of the United States, and only the president of the United States, is responsible for carrying out “the executive power” of which Article II speaks is not a mere “theory.”
It is, as Barr said, a “description of what the Framers unquestionably did in Article II.”
When anyone else in the executive branch — be it Deep State, Shallow State or anywhere in between — attempts to undermine and thwart the president’s executive power, such action is not merely insubordinate or morally problematic. It is outright unconstitutional.
The executive power incontrovertibly includes within its ambit all “residual” foreign-affairs powers, meaning all foreign-affairs powers not legislatively vested in Congress in Article I, Section 8.
It is appropriate for top-level national security advisers to offer substantive opinions to the president. But Vindman has testified that he never even directly communicated with Trump.
Vindman actually attempted to deliberately thwart or undermine the duly enacted president’s foreign policy agenda, he was attempting to unconstitutionally carry out the executive power that the Constitution of the United States vests in the president of the United States alone.
Executive power, especially in the areas of foreign policy and national security, flows from the very person of the president. A lieutenant colonel has no right to interfere with the president’s discretion or attempt to undermine the president’s authority over policy disagreements — which is what the impeachment allegations amount to.
Now this piece of insubordinate crap is rightfully dismissed from his perch on the National Security Council.
Vindman followed the rules and spoke the truth, as did Sondland and the others.
Let me know when that article 32 session on charges of insubordination starts.
And Sondland testified that when he spoke to Trump, Trump told him no quid pro quo's. Out of all the witnesses, he's the only one that talked with Trump directly.
This debate is back and forth, back and forth. It reminds me of an old George Carling joke: When two people are in an elevator and one of them farts, they both know who did it.
We all read the transcript. We all know what Trump said, so when you on the left keep repeating the lies, it's not going to make us believe them.
Trump never threatened aid to Ukraine.
Zelensky stated he felt no pressure from President Trump.
Biden was not Trump's rival. It was almost a year before their nominee would be selected.
The aid was released, two weeks before the deadline.
Trump got nothing in return, therefore, no quid pro quo.
Quid pro quo's have been used by most Presidents. They are not against the law.
If you honestly read the transcript, it proves that Trump was pressuring Ukraine to open a phony investigation. We also have Giuliani's attempts to do the same and now trying to palm off Russian misinformation.
Trump did threaten to withhold aid. Giuliani's effort was ongoing well before the call.
Zelensky is not going to get involved in this.
Biden is running for the same office Trump is.
The aid was released once it became public knowledge.
Trump wanted a phony investigation but the sordid affair became public. Even Mulvaney confirms the quid pro quo.
It is abuse of power as pressuring a foreign country to investigate a political rival is not a part of any legitimate foreign policy.
The voters see who the corrupt leader is. It is Donald Trump.
He reported what he heard. Pressuring a foreign government to investigate a political rival is not a legitimate foreign policy.
You have no clue what the truth is.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
BYU QB jake Retzlaff accused of sexual assault in civil suit- Started by tyroneweaver
- Replies: 0
-
Retail giant Target punished for NOT being racist.
- Started by StatesRightsForever
- Replies: 3
-
Gabbard Aide Ordered Intel Change So It Couldn’t Be Used Against Trump- Started by IM2
- Replies: 17
