You reap what you sow
- Thread starter transporter
- Start date
PsyOps
Pixelated
Vindman immigrated here from the Ukraine, so he likely speaks the language and could provide translations. But, considering how corrupt people are from the Ukraine... well, you can make your own conclusions on that.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Nah, he'll just go work for CNN as an "analyst".
PsyOps
Pixelated
I was meaning the military. Guys that get up to this rank are very career-minded and aim big for rank. They consider it a huge failure not achieve that next rank. Of course, that's a broad statement and can't apply to everyone. Maybe this guy doesn't care and can just settle for retiring at LtC.
My larger point is, if this guy is lying that is a UCMJ offense and he would likely be courts martialed, largely because it pertains specifically to the president. It would interesting to see someone go to Leavenworth who was part of the deep state.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
Also from his statement was a discussion on chain of command...
none of your questions serve to discredit Vindman. I’m sure we will get more clarity as this goes to the senate.
I dont think that is a valid conclusion.
And I said nothing to discredit him, just wondering why he didn't exercise his legal option of being a whistleblower. Now as you seem to think chain of command is significant to Vindman, didn't the WH state that the Executive wasn't going to cooperate with the committees inquiry? So much for chain of command, huh?
WingsOfGold
Well-Known Member
He and the lil bastard Teddy Lieu will defect to their motherlands.
PsyOps
Pixelated
This is proof that you only disagree for the sake of disagreeing. It was in your own words that he reported this to his chain of command. You report things UP not down or laterally. Of course the other conclusion I can surmise from your point I quoted is that you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to military matters.
PsyOps
Pixelated
I'm really struggling to understand why this guy felt a need to blow some bull#### whistle on a feeling he had about the call. There's nothing he claimed was illegal. He was simply uncomfortable with the call. I'm uncomfortable with a lot of things Trump does; but my comfort level doesn't equate to illegalities. This guy got used by the democrats. I won't be surprised to hear later on, from some of his troops, that is a flaming liberal.
WingsOfGold
Well-Known Member
Perhaps he wants to be a hero or something? Hopefully he will slip up and get a BCD and no retirement.
Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
Vindman is in the same "MOS" (actual term, for those who care, is "functional area") I was in and he has/had similar jobs to what I had for 2/3 of my 30+ year career. And having that frame of reference, for a number of reasons what I'm reading about his involvement doesn't sound kosher. At a minimum, it seems like he's someone's tool/that he's being used. Would be interesting to know if he knows it or not.
Right or wrong his military career is almost certainly over. Not that he will have a hard post-military landing....
--- End of line (MCP)
Right or wrong his military career is almost certainly over. Not that he will have a hard post-military landing....
--- End of line (MCP)
Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
The Beltway's 'Whistleblower' Furor Obsesses Over One Name
By Paul Sperry, RealClearInvestigationsOctober 30, 2019, 4:21 PM Eastern For a town that leaks like a sieve, Washington has done an astonishingly effective job keeping from the American public the nam
And there may be an angle that includes Vindman:
And this:
emphasis added
Read the entire article. You'll be glad/mad/sad you did.
--- End of line (MCP)
Last edited:
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
Vindman said CoC was important to him, not me.
was Vindman ordered not to testify? If not his oath was to the constitution.
The problem with your ‘logic’ is that there were numerous other people on the call. The WB could have gotten the information about the call from any of them. Therefore, the WB is not necessarily in Vindmans chain of command. I understand chain of command just fine, it is your cognitive ability that is suspect.
PsyOps
Pixelated
You're questioning my 'logic' with "could haves"? Okie dokie dude.
This_person
Well-Known Member
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
The Beltway's 'Whistleblower' Furor Obsesses Over One Name
By Paul Sperry, RealClearInvestigationsOctober 30, 2019, 4:21 PM Eastern For a town that leaks like a sieve, Washington has done an astonishingly effective job keeping from the American public the namwww.realclearinvestigations.com
And there may be an angle that includes Vindman:
And this:
emphasis added
Read the entire article. You'll be glad/mad/sad you did.
--- End of line (MCP)
This brings up an interesting thought on my end.
You seems to have respect for the military institution. You appear to have some background in foreign affairs and maybe even some level of intelligence role within the govt at some point in your life/career and respect the idea that many military/intel folks are inherently good people who took an oath to defend this country.
Yet in the article you link, you highlight that the person was "held over from the Obama era". While it's certainly possible that not every military/intel official is ethical, it seems myopic to seemingly dismiss him simply because he worked under a Democrat administration or supported a Democratic president, or that he specialized in Russia and Ukraine (it would make sense that someone in the NSC with that background would be involved in the call to Ukraine in some aspects)
The article does note that the ICIG found "some indicia of an arguable political bias", it fails to note that immediately after that line, the ICIG stated that "such evidence did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern 'appears credible', particularly given the other information the ICIG obtained during its preliminary review. The article does not mention that despite the WB submitting his concerns before the Ukraine call transcript came out, the complaint matches the official transcript too much to be made up.
Your article appears to focus more on the guy's political leanings and less on substance. I find it a bit odd that you'd seemingly decide that his time in the military/intelligence community and the oath that he took means squat because he shares different political beliefs. Now, it 's completely possible it's some sort of political hit job, I'm not denying that, just that the article appears to be trying to discredit this person based, not on facts of him being incorrect, but on his political leanings with the implication that politics has overridden his oath he took (likely) many years ago without question thus far.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
Your assumption was that the WB ‘could only be one of vindman’s higherups’. The could haves I describe prove your assumption is faulty.
