Tags
Alexander Vindman, Barack Obama "flexibility", deep state moles, Gordon Sondland, john kerry, National Security Council, President Trump, Purple Heart, whistleblowers
Former National Security Staffer Lt. Col. Alexander “That’s Lt. Col. to you, Congressman” Vindman, and some 70 other Obama holdovers on the NSC, have been shown the door, as The Washington Examiner reports:
Officials confirmed that Trump and national security adviser Robert O’Brien have cut 70 positions inherited from former President Barack Obama, who had fattened the staff to 200.
Many were loaners from other agencies and have been sent back. Others left government work.
The NSC, which is the president’s personal staff, was rocked when a “whistleblower” leveled charges that led to Trump’s impeachment.
Last week, one key official who testified against Trump at a House hearing on the Ukraine affair that led to impeachment was sent packing. Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman was returned to the Pentagon. His twin brother, Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, was also given the boot. Trump had expressed displeasure that Alexander Vindman had testified against him when the Ukraine specialist said he did not like the phone conversation between the president and a newly elected president of Ukraine.
D/S/Cs are, of course, mad(der) with rage at the great injustice of removing Vindman and his brother from the NSC. Why, Vindman is a decorated war hero! There are national TV commercials saying just that, of course, if this were not an election year, and D/S/Cs didn’t think they might be able to harm Trump with them, they’d be as interested in Vindman as they were the various women accusing Justice Kavanaugh after he was confirmed. He’s a paragon of virtue for participating in the coup against Trump! How dare Trump punish a whistleblower! Why Trump also removed EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland, who also participated in the coup. He’s a whistleblower too! Orange man bad! Bad! Bad! Bad! Paul Mirengoff of Powerline comments:
But was it improper for Trump to take these personnel actions?
Sondland’s case seems easy to me. Ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the President. Trump lost confidence in Sondland. Thus, his removal made sense.
Vindman’s case is somewhat different and less easy for me. Unlike Sondland, he’s a career government employee and military man. Thus, ousting him from the government would be highly problematic, in my view.
However, Vindman wasn’t ousted from the government. He was reassigned to the Pentagon.
As far as I know, Vindman will suffer no loss of pay or rank. Nor is it extraordinary for NSC staffers to be sent back to their previous posting. As I understand it, these people often circulate back and forth from their Department to the White House. In fact, Vindman was scheduled to rotate back to the Pentagon this summer.
Take the link and read the rest of Mirengoff’s article. One need not be overly sad for Sondland. He’s a wealthy businessman, and will not, in any way, be financially harmed by Mr. Trump’s decision. Let us consider reality.
The people let go by President Trump were appointees, non-civil service members of the executive branch. It is common for presidents to clean out every appointee of the previous administration, including US Attorneys.. Mr. Trump did not do this, which in hind sight, seems a mistake. They serve at the President’s pleasure, a term of some importance in the current situation.
D/S/Cs are screaming that Trump let them go—particularly Sondland and Vindman—because he is punishing them for being whistleblowers. They were not, in law or fact, whistleblowers. Sondland was the only D/S/C witness that actually spoke with President Trump about the Ukrainian affair. Under questioning by D/S/Cs, he neglected to tell the whole truth, saying he “surmised” Mr. Trump wanted a quid pro quo. It was only when questioned by Republicans that he admitted Mr. Trump specifically told him he wanted no quid pro quo, and his belief in a quid pro quo was nothing more than his own guess, informed by gossip. No other witness, Vindman included, ever spoke with Mr. Trump. They had no first hand knowledge about anything, just second, third and more handed gossip and supposition.
It matters not why Mr. Trump fired Sondland, he had the authority to fire him for any reason, including his part in spreading false rumors and participating in the coup. Any President that did not employ only people willing to honorably carry out his policies is a fool, yet D/S/Cs argue that Mr. Trump is somehow being dishonorable, even criminal, in ridding himself of people who have bragged their foreign policy desires take precedence over the one elected official—the President–given the power to formulate and apply them.
Why did Mr. Trump wait so long to fire these Deep State moles? D/S/Cs are claiming Trump must have trusted Vindman, only firing him in retaliation for his noble and truthful testimony. Nonsense. It was political reality. Trump had to wait until he was acquitted to take that step. Had he fired them earlier, particularly when they so blatantly and publically outed themselves as narcissistic usurpers, D/S/Cs—media always included—would have screamed “obstruction of Congress/justice” to high heaven, demanded another special prosecutor, a triple secret impeachment, and advocated Trump be drawn and quartered on the Mall. Even had he fired these people prior to when D/S/Cs were casting about for a faux-scandal on which to hang impeachment, they would surely have been used in the same ways by D/S/C ankle biters.
Lt. Col. Vindman, however, is a special case. In testimony before Congress, he disparaged the President, and actually said he—and other bureaucrats–was defending the official foreign policy of the United States from the President’s interference. In other words, it is the permanent bureaucracy, the eternal Deep State of unelected bureaucrats that holds and exercises ultimate executive power, not the President, particularly if he is a Republican. Bureaucrats subvert him, lie about him, undermine him at every opportunity, even counsel foreign leaders of enemy nations not to treat with him because he’ll be gone soon and then, as Barack Obama said, they’ll have more flexibility to betray American interests.
Everyone in the military, virtually from the day of their induction, is taught military personnel do not, in any way, and absolutely never publically, criticize those in positions of authority above them. This includes the Commander In Chief–the President Of The United States. They are taught—and this is continually reinforced—they are never to be political, in or out of uniform. They are also taught never to jump the chain of command, and refusal to obey an order, or to in any way weasel around one, is insubordination, a very serious offense. Anyone who so disparages a superior officer, to say nothing of the CIC, is normally in serious trouble indeed.
I’ve seen reporting indicating Vindman was ordered not to testify. If so, disobeying that order is a violation of the UCMJ. I’ve also seen reporting that at least one of Vindman’s past superior officers said he often went around the chain of command, and was a political operative in uniform. It has also been reported, and apparently confirmed, that Vindman repeatedly briefed the Ukranian President on how to deal with President Trump, and he routinely disparaged Mr. Trump to fellow officers and foreign nationals. If any of this is accurate, and it appears to be, Vindman is lucky not to be court-martialed.
Oh, but Vindman’s evaluations were excellent! In fact, he read from an evaluation during his testimony, and he’s another Napolean at least! How could Trump fire such a brilliant military leader?
As anyone that has been in the military, particularly the ranks of officers, knows, any officer’s evaluation that does not portray him or her as the second incarnation of George Patton is essentially career ending. Writing euphemistic evaluations is a military art form, and the kind of verbiage that might strike civilians as so outlandish as to be embarrassing, is merely middle of the road stuff—weak tea–for officer’s evaluations.
I do not know Vindman, nor am I informed about his career or accomplishments, but my impression, for what little it is worth, is he is a bureaucratic warrior, a chair bourn commando rather than a war fighter, a man whose career was focused at behind the scenes maneuvering rather than maneuvering on the field of battle.
But what about his purple heart? The Purple Heart is awarded for injuries suffered in combat that require treatment by a doctor. There is no doubt some soldiers actually injured have been passed over, while others, such as John Kerry, have been given the medal for the most trifling scratches. Kerry, a man who is arguably a traitor, for he gave aid and comfort to the enemy in wartime, made sure he got the award for a tiny piece of metal a doctor removed from his epidermis with a tweezers and covered with a Bandaid. Tens of thousands of honorable servicemen and women would have never accepted a medal for such an “injury.” I do not know the circumstances of Vindman’s award apart from it apparently had something to do with a roadside bomb. The point is this medal, and others, do not render anyone permanently noble, virtuous, eternally immune from criticism or immune from the consequences of their action, nor does any decoration guarantee anyone a lifetime appointment on the National Security Staff.
At least for the time being, Vindman is not being discharged from the military, nor is there any adverse action being taken against him by the Army. At his rank, it is likely he is already eligible for retirement, and the retirement pay of his rank is not insignificant. He will merely be reassigned—likely to the Pentagon; the field of battle where he is most competent—and his career will continue. He will lose no pay or benefits. He has lost the President’s confidence, so he will no longer have anything to do with the White House.
But what about his career? This disgrace could keep him from advancement! That’s possible, and should it happen, it’s his fault, no one else’s. Any military officer doing what Vindman has done should count himself fortunate not to be involuntary separated from the military.
Everything Mr. Trump did was entirely within his constitutional authority. Even if his sole motivation in removing Vindman and Sondland was anger at their testimony, that is a perfectly valid reason to remove them, but the record makes clear there was much more, and the fact that some 70 have already been removed from the NSC with more to come also speaks to less personal motives. But again, they served at the pleasure of the President. Anyone in such a posting must understand that, and please the President, who has the absolute, sole power to demand that all that work for him are loyal to the Constitution and abie to wholeheartedly work to support this policies. As Barack Obama also said: “elections have consequences.”
But, but… complain about that to the more than 200 high ranking officers removed by Barack Obama because they were not politically reliable and insisted on preparing for war rather than implementing Obama’s social engineering projects.
Vindman’s ego would not allow him to comport himself properly as an officer. He thought himself superior to the President of the United States. He took part in a coup. He deserves everything he has gotten, and much, much more.
“Excellence seldom equalled” is a term I recall my Dad using regarding military evaluations. As I remember that translated to barely making the cut. There are others, but I forget what they were.
I remember Ambassador Y during her testimony repeatedly having to be corrected that it was the President who set foreign policy, not ‘we’ as she kept on saying (meaning the interagency).
My theory proved to be correct. While his hands were tied, Trump
could do little without causing the Democrats to scream “obstruction
of justice.” The moment he was acquitted, he came out swinging;
The Vindman Brothers and Ambassador Sondland were shown
the door.
AG Barr filed indictments on 8 individuals who were funneling illegal
foreign money to Adam Schitt and 7 Democrat Senators.
AG Barr has filed federal suits on public figures in cities, counties,
and states with sanctuary status.
70 NSC staffers were shown the door. About a month after the
Russian collusion narrative was revealed to be a hoax, Dan Bongino
stated that he would be shocked if President Trump was not already
conducting a rat hunt in the executive branch. He called it early on.
AG Barr has asked Rudy Guilini to let him take a look at his Ukraine
notes.
A criminal investigation of Hunter Biden was announced.
The deep state responded with another hoax involving Roger Stone.
All four lawyers who railroaded Stone with “process crimes,” bolted
from the government “in protest.” Translation, it was a CYA moment.
They did not want their methods investigated.
Trump is just getting started!
In following this story in the media, I was appalled at Vindman’s actions. While he might escape punishment under the UCMJ, I suspect he is terminal at LTC.
Yet today… Gen. John Kelly says…
“He did exactly what we teach them to do from cradle to grave, He went and told his boss what he just heard.”
Now I will await the dissing-to-come of Kelly.
Never in my entire life have I witnessed the total devotion to a single person as much as the blind devotion given by supporters of Trump. I have never, and will never, surrender that kind of worship toward ANY human being… much less surrender my morality to conjured up fear and intimidation by a person of incompetence who claims omnipotence over the law… and finds the Constitution simply a “suggestion”, and “in the way”, if even that. To me the man is a clear & present danger to the country; to his supporters he’s some kind of Renaissance Man. The storm he creates in his wake will continue and get far worse heading into the election.
Doug,
“Worship”?! Get a grip man. Trump is doing EXACTLY what he said he would do on the campaign trail. By that measure he’s the most honest politician in my lifetime.
Trump has many personal flaws, which are quite apparent for all to see. But that simply means that he’s just another flawed human, like everyone else. However he is working hard to right our listing ship. And for that he gets the support of many.
And he’s restoring respect for the Constitution by faithfully following the law. He’s building the wall, for instance, as allowed by a 1970s era national emergency act. His tariffs too are allowed under existing law. This is in stark contrast to his predecessor who abused executive orders, ignored many laws, used the IRS to suppress the tea party, had the CIA and FBI to spy on his political opponents, signed treaties without submitting them to congress (Paris climate accord, etc), and attacked Libya without congressional authorization.
Dear The other Phil:
Conservatives are not prone to worship any politician. Their support is, as you say, predicated on their adherence to the Constitution and the rule of law, and their perceived caring for Americans and America. Tragic that’s so rare circa 2020.
Dear Doug:
I fear you’re caught in a time loop. No one is calling Donald Trump “The One,” a “messiah,” or “sort of God.” No reporters are drooling over his “glistening pecs,” or writing odes to his hindquarters in jeans. You’re obviously thinking of Barack Obama, not Trump.
No one thinks Trump anything other than a man who is keeping his promises, who actually fights, and who, to date, has the backs of Americans who support American Constitutionalism.
WRONG again Doug! He bypassed the chain of command by spouting
lies to treasonous liberal Democrats for political reasons. Under cross-
examination by House republicans, he recanted his story (as did every
other one of the Trump accusers) so as to avoid perjury charges. A
proper course of action would be to report to his superior officers at
the Pentagon, not give false testimony against his Commander In
Chief! Now that he is back with the military, he will be lucky if he
does not end up in a one-man post in the Arctic Circle.
Oh lordy.. where do you get this stuff, Phil. Cite to me where all this occurred.
A prog was going on about Trump removing Vindman’s brother and asked why, because he hadn’t testified.
I said “The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The friend of my enemy is not my friend.”
I think it’s more like the other authoritarians Trump admires.. like Kim, Putin, et al… retribution not only against the “traitor” but also the family… to set the next example of intimidation.
” it’s more like the other authoritarians Trump admires.. like Kim, Putin, et al…”
Evidence, please.
Michael F Adams is 100% correct. Dissent is not allowed by true dictators. By that measure, Trump is a horrible dictator. In fact, all of those trying to silence opposing voices are on the left, in the press, Hollywood, on college campuses, and big tech firms. Same with political violence, whether against conservative speakers on campuses, voter registration drives in parking lots, or republican politicians at a baseball charity practice.
Sounds like you’re feeling the pressure, Mr. Phil. Ever stop to think it’s less about his.. er, I mean, His, policies and more an aggravation about him personally? In here I get the same reasoning… much like the spineless Senate GOP… yep, he’s a jerk, but because he makes his promises good, he’s OUR jerk. No.. that’s not the real reason because any recent president (pick one… um.. Obama?) has completed more of their campaign promises at this same point than Trump has. What you really mean is that he’s carrying the torch for the promises YOU like. Nothing wrong with that.. each to their own. But look at what you’ve given up to get even a little of that.
Doug,
“But men are hopeless creatures, and the less they concentrate on their own sins, the more interested they become in the sins of others. They seek to criticize, not to correct. Unable to excuse themselves, they are ready to accuse others.” St Augustine
I don’t know you, but I know that you’re probably a sinner, just like everyone else. You might want to spend some time getting your own house in order before you criticize the world.
Of course I am a sinner; no “probably” about it. Lest ye who is without sin cast the first stone… kinda sinner. Finding sin in the world is not difficult at all; we begin each day looking into a mirror to meet the first sinner. So.. do we retreat and fear it or take it up as a challenge?
“There is only one way to avoid criticism… do nothing, say nothing, and be nothing.” – Aristotle.
Just to be clear, people and their families who disagree with Kim get molten steel poured on them. If President Trump did that, I am sure we would have heard about it.
And if we did hear about it, no problem at all.. as it would be dismissed as fake news from a Liberal press
@Doug, it’s almost as if journalists have squandered any reputation for truthfulness that they may have once had.
Like some repliers in here, who have been sleeping on FOX 24/7 and ask me for evidence of Trump’s lies., someone present me with “evidence” of MSNBC, CNN, or the three broadcast networks, not being trustworthy or truthful… consistently enough to be accused of being fake news.
Dude. CNN literally just settled a defamation lawsuit.
But that’s not “evidence.”
And how many lawsuits has FOX had? Or Limbaugh?
If you recall, I said consistent evidence. Not some singular occurance . Because what I truly think what Conservatives are miffed about with the media is that the media generally reports on Trump’s “negatives”.. his dismissing of traditional norms and erratic behavior. If negatives are factual then where’s the fake?
Oh Doug, Mike would need another blog to really answer that one.
Look up any article about the Nunes memo and Adam Schiff’s rebuttal. The Horowitz report validated every single part of Nunes’ memo. Shiff’s was…well, full of shiff.
Or all of the articles and reports that Trump colluded with Russia. Mueller report said otherwise.
And it’s not always what they say, it’s often what they omit. The Horowitz report says that by January 2017 the FBI/DOJ knew that the Steele dossier was unreliable, so what was Mueller investigating for 2.5 years? It’s most likely that Mueller walked in on his first day after being appointed special council and asked “show me the Russian stuff” and they had nothing, yet they spent 2.5 years doing what exactly?
What about Nellie Ohr working for Fusion GPS when the Steele Dossier was produced, who happened to be married to Bruce Ohr, the #3 guy at DOJ.
When Anthony Weener was busted for doing improper stuff with a minor in September 2016, right before the election, the FBI seized his laptop and found 30,000 of Hillary’s emails. See, Weener was married to Huma, Hillary’s aide. Every one of those could be a separate felony, for mishandling classified emails. The DOJ recently admitted in court filings that they never examined the laptop. It would seem that this would be something that the press would want to ask about, no?
Or little things like every story about Colin Kapernick says that he hasn’t played in the NFL since he started kneeling, implying a cause-effect relationship, without including the important fact that he’d been benched for poor performance BEFORE he started kneeling.
Well, Phil, I’m not a conspiracy theory buff… especially those that have proven no substance. But then again, you never know.. maybe that’s what “they” want us to believe, right?
“proven no substance”?? By who? The same democrats and media who started the fake stories? Ha. Believe whatever you want to get through your day. The truth will eventually come out, although probably not until 2021, after Trumps HUGE victory in November.
Back when Bill Clinton was elected, I was on active duty. At Clinton’s staff request a DOD Instruction (a law for military) was circulated that I had never heard of before that. It said it was against regulations for an active duty military officer to say anything negative about the president in public EVEN IF IT WAS TRUE. We all have to read and acknowledge we had read. I put my retirement papers in shortly after that.
From Doug:
‘Yet today… Gen. John Kelly says…
“He did exactly what we teach them to do from cradle to grave, He went and told his boss what he just heard.”’
No he didn’t tell his boss. He went over his boss’s head. To Schiff’s people. To ICIG Atkinson, who had no authority over the President or his calls as POTUS is not part of the IC. Vindman was given an order not to testify but did so anyway claiming that it was his duty to because in his opinion, and the opinion of his identical twin brother, the call constituted a crime. An opinion the DOJ rejected.
You apparently hate the current POTUS as much as many people seem to worship him and hang on his very tweet. I’m not one of them. I’m a Dershowitz and McCarthy and Turley kind of guy, who believes the Constitution and the Rule of Law is more important than any man or woman, no matter how despicable they may be.
And Trump has done some pretty bad things in his past. I recall very well how he screwed over his contractors in the 1970’s and 1980’s. I knew some of those people who were screwed. I voted for the SOB because Her Odiousness was worse. And I’m going to vote for him again because the Democrats, and the Republicans, aren’t providing any alternative worth a damn.
For not being a Trump lover you certainly sound as if you have no problem sharing the bed.
For one thing.. “Schiff’s people” is the United State House of Representatives.. and since Conservatives love to cast around the two fave terms they all enjoy.. “law abiding” and “duly elected”.. the House is duly elected and has the Constitutional responsibility to provide oversight to the Executive. If the House felt it necessary to vote to impeach, they did. If the Senate votes to acquit.. they did. The process was carried out according to the Constitution to the letter. The voters will determine which side of the argument is the sham.
I have NO problem with Trump getting rid of Vindman. Obviously there’s a conflict that would continue in the NSC and that should not continue inside any part of the White House. BUT.. it was the way Trump did it.. a perp walk out is not the way for a person of his distinction.. and the same with the others… and his brother? Most, if not all, had plans to leave government service soon anyway.. and Trump just wanted to press a point and do it his own way.
My “hate” for Trump is about the man of his incompetent stature occupying the White House… Constitutionally “duly elected”, but not obviously with the support of the majority. My “hate” of his occupying the White House is purely motivated by my level of patriotism, which sadly is a word tossed around pretty randomly these days.. along with the designation of “hero”, which ironically I don’t think he’s made that claim onto himself….. yet..
Almost every job in the white house and the old executive office building is at the pleasure of the president. POTUS does not have to answer to anybody. For whatever reason, if POTUS doesn’t want you there, you’re gone. If you’re civil service or military, your not fired, you’re just re-assigned. If you’re a political appointee, then you’re fired, but that was the condition of your hiring. Anyone at that level of executive position has the right to have people around them that they trust. That’s it. The fact that Gen. Kelly blather such BS is truly troubling.
Mike –
In the blogosphere, you know you’ve arrived when you have a professional troll like Doug. And on no less that Valentine’s Day. Congratulations!
P. S. – I won’t be missing captain vindaloo AT ALL. Our military can always do with one less insubordinate weasel…
Well, hey.. if you fellows prefer to sit around and make posts all day long bashing the world for your own sorry lot in life.. and then all clamor in agreement, that is as valid as anything else in Blogland… go for it. I’ll not stand in the way.
By the way.. thanks for calling me a “professional” troll. I’d hate to have been a half-assed one.
Dear Doug:
One always appreciates true professionalism. :)
Dougie, the source was the televised House impeachment hearings.
Every one of the 15 or 17 prosecution witnesses broke down on
cross-examination when asked if they had ANY firsthand knowledge
of wrongdoing on the part of the president. Just like in a court of
law, Congress does not allow hearsay evidence. Most of them
were spouting 2nd, 3rd, and even 4th hand hearsay. Go to You-
tube and see for yourself.
Also, Vindman did, in fact, violate the chain of command. If an LTC
accuses a general of wrongdoing, he has to go through the proper
channels. His boss (then and now) is the Commander in Chief
of the armed forces, President Donald Trump. He and his twin
brother (a leaker of classified information) will be lucky if they
do not end up with a dishonorable discharge!
Here we go…
1. Vindman had a request from top NSC lawyer Eisenberg, prior to any phone calls, that if he (Vindman) had any “heads up” concerns about any phone calls to let him (Eisenberg) know. Vindman did, in fact, let Eisenberg know. Eisenberg then shared the info with his deputy, Michael Ellis and they proceeded to sequester the sensitive call in that security server.
2. In Vindman’s own testimony to the committee he stated he made an attempt to meet with new boss of one week, Morrison.. and then ceased when Eisenberg instructed him not to talk to anyone about it.
3. As the parade of accusers who said Vindman was some sort of incompetent slouch came forward, Vindman himself showed his own exemplary performance reviews from his superiors, along with the accolades from Fiona Hill, his former boss, and others in the diplomatic channels. At best.. or worst… using a “lack of performance” as an argument for anything is irrelevant “noise”.
4. Vindman’s direct report was not The President… and what the President said was not a direct order to him (Vindman) for Vindman to make some decision to follow or not. But rather a very suspect legitimate legal concern in which he was correct in passing to the persons that he did.
5. Was Vindman guilty of some level of insubordination by ignoring the President’s order and testifying? I’m not knowledgeable enough on the direct written word in the UCMJ that covers this, but simply on the surface it would seem Vindman did defy the President’s order.. which then makes his defiance a personal moral dilemma.. but has nothing to do with the reporting of phone call suspicions of Trump’s real intentions his up his channel.
6. This suggestion that there was some “dramatic” take-down of the witnesses who testified following some “rigorous” questions from the Republican GOP committee members is just grasping nonsense. No one fessed up to anything. The single question constantly brought forward by the Republican committee members was.. “Did you actually hear the president say quid pro quo?” Of course no one did. Duh. A murderer doesn’t have to say he committed a murder to get convicted of killing someone.
7. There’s been no evidence of anyone leaking anything. Although a lot of Trump supporters want to believe this.
8. Congress does not allow hearsay evidence? Where is that written? Seems to me Congress as a whole has and always will, decide for themselves on what is evidence and what to ignore.
As Mike likes to present to illustrate his opinion is just a matter of common sense….. all you have to do to see the “truth” is Google…. In this case, any fact check site.
Dear Doug:
Did he commit insubordination? Yes, which is indeed common sense/knowledge to anyone that has served, to say nothing of enforcing the UCMJ during their service. I did not say Congress is prohibited from entertaining hearsay. I merely suggest it’s lacking as evidence, rather than what D/S/Cs would have us believe.
Keep in mind what you’re relaying form Google is media accounts of what people like Vindman and his allies had to say. This too is not dispositive evidence.
Vindman’s alleged insubordination is irrelevant to the entire impeachment. It’s conjured up reason for Trump defenders to assign a meaning to having Vindman perp-walked out of the White House. Not my argument… and I am sure he was aware of the potential ramifications of what his testimony would do to his career. That part I totally admire. He made a personal decision based on his own moral convictions and it has come with a personal sacrifice. That’s called political collateral and he should consider a run for public office (that does NOT mean I would support his political views, whatever they are, however.). His future should be fine.
Depositive evidence? In a court of law.. maybe (and that’s a “maybe”). In Congress it’s whatever everyone buys into.
This whole impeachment play-act always failed the most basic smell test: If Obama had done what DJT did, would the Dems have pushed for his removal from office? It is to laugh.
He did worse, on tape, with Medvedev.
A purely partisan impeachment is illegitimate on its face.
Read and learn… although, be careful.. it’s not a source of the “high quality” as the Ministry of Propaganda Fox News…
https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/nov/14/obamas-hot-mic-moment-russian-president-2012-was-u/
Obama said “give me something (space) that will directly help me win an election and I will pay you back after it by bending American policy towards what you (Russia) perceive to be in your interest.”
Ukraine is beside the point. They were discussing the defense of the whole of Europe.
I mean, if they were not working out a quid pro quo, why were they even having the conversation?
Ohh.. c’mon, Mr. Rum…. get it straight….
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-tells-medvedev-solution-on-missile-defense-is-unlikely-before-elections/2012/03/26/gIQASoblbS_story.html
Seems more like Obama was asking Putin (through Medvedev) for more time until he got re-elected in order to re-engage in talks with Putin; after the election where he could provide more focus on the talks as well as have more support confidence of a second term president. Sounds all great to me. Where’s the personal advantage… much less any quid pro quo for Russian influence?
So, the most dem-friendly source in the known universe can come up with a framing of Obamas motivations that make him look innocent and that settles the matter but Fox cannot do the same for DJT? When the subject is impeachment?
I am sorry, but removing a President just before an election should never be done based on the remote mind reading of intentions.
Especially regarding DJT, who famously does not always use words that accurately reveal his actual thoughts and intentions.
Yet each and every Trump supporter is an avowed “Trump Whisperer” and can amazingly interpret all the Trump lies, preposterous bravado claims, and schoolyard name-calling, as simply being “out of context”.. or, my personal fave… “the anti-Trumpers have picked on him so much he has a right to fight back” poor boy victim.
You are entitled to your opinion, sir.. and in this day and age you are apparently entitled to your own facts.
Ever given it a thought as to why Trump can’t seem to accurately reveal his intentions? Doesn’t it seem a bit off the mark a person like that holds the most powerful position of leadership on the planet?
I am guessing that Doug slept through his elementary school civics
classes. He stated that Vindman went over the president’s head
by taking his complaint to congress. Congress does NOT have
oversight of the executive branch! The United States Constitution
created three separate (and coequal) branches of government. In
any dispute between the branches, the proper course of action is
to take the matter/s to the federal courts. The Donks wanted to
compel testimony from White House staffers and executive branch
heads in an effort to get them to cough up privileged information.
For the sake of constitutional illiterates, this means any conversation
with the president is covered by executive privilege. And President
Trump did just that by taking the matter to the federal judiciary!
As for the president’s call to the Ukrainian president, one would
have to be illiterate to claim that it was predicated on any condition
whatsoever. Despite the leftist media attempt to paint this transcript
as a “reconstruction,” even the original fake whistleblower admitted
that these kinds of communications are verbatim! Yes, the subject
of the Biden Crime Family came up, but not in the context of a
condition. Furthermore, how can one claim that the aid was held
up when it was released AHEAD of the OMB deadline? These
deep state jackholes cannot even get the timeline right! The
difference between liberals and conservatives is that we actually
read, while liberals get their talking points from CNN.
“I am guessing that Doug slept through his elementary school civics
classes. He stated that Vindman went over the president’s head
by taking his complaint to congress. Congress does NOT have
oversight of the executive branch! The United States Constitution
created three separate (and coequal) branches of government. In
any dispute between the branches, the proper course of action is
to take the matter/s to the federal courts.”
Whoa.. Lenny… methinks you cut school in civic class! First off.. I never stated Vindman went over the President’s head. He didn’t “take his complaint to Congress..” he was subpoenaed to testify. He took his complaint to the NSC lawyer who requested him to do so. He defied the President’s order not to testify and if that carries consequences legally for him so be it. I’m sure he predicted any number of ramifications.
Second off… well, heck.. read this.. I’m not typing it…
“Congressional oversight is oversight by the United States Congress over the Executive Branch, including the numerous U.S. federal agencies. … Congress’s oversight authority derives from its “implied” powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and Senate rules.”
The whole idea of the system of checks & balances is oversight of each other to certain extents. My gawd, man.. I thought you were the bunch who wanted to keep to the language of the Found Fathers in the Constitution… now you wanna re-write it to keep Trump in office??
Doug,
FDR forbade anyone taking notes of his conversations in the Oval Office because he fully intended to tell his next visitor something the opposite of what he had just averred to his current friend. Almost everything he said to anyone was his idea of 4 D chess.
Ben Franklin remarked that saying what one really thought as a politician was usually a terrible idea.
DJT is not in over his head as POTUS. He never was. Maybe, just maybe, he is the most naturally gifted political actor since Charlemagne.
I think we can rest assured (at least I can with 99% accuracy) Trump has never read anything FDR or BF with the intent to emulate their fame as they weren’t authoritarians or dictators.
As for your aberration in comparing Trump as being the most naturally gifted political actor since Charlemagne.. we don’t have to go that far back in time. I recall a nationalist dictatorial ruckus from another fellow in Europe in the 30’s who had all the answers, also lied, and also had a devoted following. But.. hey, it’s all relative, right?
Lest any of you misjudge my intentions, I am the only true conservative in this conversation. All of the rest of you are authoritarians in your subconscious hearts. You notice that I generously do not impugn your conscious motives; you are only made stupid by your inability to exorcise your Hitler worship (no doubt origined in an unresolved anal phase). Be that as it may, I will be lenient on you by eschewing the tawdry tools of logical fallacies. Computer-like reasoning, precise choice of words, and the priority of truth have been–nay!–are me. And I have been called a troll for this.
Forgive them Father.
TRUMP 2036 !!!
TRUMP 4-EVER!
“Vindman’s case is somewhat different and less easy for me. Unlike Sondland, he’s a career government employee and military man. Thus, ousting him from the government would be highly problematic, in my view.”
It’s actually not problematic at all. Vindman isn’t in the GOVERNMENT; he works FOR the government, or at least he’s paid to. We shouldn’t consider anyone who works as a government employee or agent as part of the government, including those in the military. The word should be more narrowly understood to mean those who actually have the authority to make laws, set policy, and interpret laws, more like the way the British use the term.
Pingback: LGBTQWERTY Embassies: Priorities | Stately McDaniel Manor