Lt Col. Vindman

bullskin

bullskin

Very Active Member
Messages
1,341
Had Lt. Col. Vindman violated the Uniform Code of Military Conduct in testifying before Congress there is no question that he would have been courtmartialed. He was not. Yet both he and his brother were forced from their positions as a result. Now, of course, he is retiring in order that his fellow officers may receive the promotions they deserve. With regard to this incident, it is difficult to understand how some criticize the soldier while supporting the civilians who drove him out of the military.
 
The problem was he took part in an investigation that was “founded” on opinions. You don’t try to impeach a president on speculation and opinion. Made himself, and everyone else look like they don’t understand laws and were wasting taxpayers money. Which he obviously doesn’t, and they obviously did.
 
mossback50cal said:
The problem was he took part in an investigation that was “founded” on opinions. You don’t try to impeach a president on speculation and opinion. Made himself, and everyone else look like they don’t understand laws and were wasting taxpayers money. Which he obviously doesn’t, and they obviously did.
Click to expand...


There is no question that this entire episode was politically inspired. Dems wanted to impeach, the President hoped to claim executive privilege in order to avoid that outcome. Both were within their rights to do so regardless of how ridiculous they appeared. But that has nothing to do with Vindman, who had only two choices--either obey Congress, or obey a lawyer representing the National Security Council. As he never received a contravening order through the chain of military command, is it appropriate to punish a soldier (and his brother) for obeying the Congressional subpoena?
 
Last edited:
That is why I am revisiting the question. As I see it, Vindman is punished by politicians though he has not committed any military or criminal offense. Under the circumstances, perhaps we should ignore the predictably contradictory messages offered by both political parties and focus instead of how the military is treating this situation. One would not expect much commentary from the top brass, but it is telling that there has been no action against Vindman except that initiated by pols. Our soldiers deserve better...
 
Last edited:
Our soldiers also deserve leaders who aren’t going to undermine the Commander in Chief over political bias and assumptions. He voluntarily testified. Then was subpoenaed by Congress. Not the other way around. They also need leaders who understand and follow OUR constitution. Not people who tip toe around it because their feelings are hurt.
 
It seems that both parties have made every effort to undermine the Commander in Chief, provided he was elected on the other ticket, which is why we should put them out of this conversation entirely.
And, again, we are not talking about "leaders" here (if politicians can even be regarded as such), my inquiry is about one soldier who, like every other, deserves better treatment by these very same politicians. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe that Lt Col Vindman offered any testimony until subpoena'd by Congress. What he did do was report his concerns to his superiors in the NSC, as was his responsibility. Is there evidence to suggest he spoke inappropriately to anyone else?
 
I’m talking about a Lt Col. he is a leader. Not about politicians. That was all geared towards him. Everything I said, he did. Yes, other people did as well. I, however, am speaking directly about him.
 
To whom else did he speak, besides his superiors (and his own lawyer, no doubt), about his concerns, prior to his subpoena?
 
STAY IN YOUR LANE.

No one gives 2chits what he thinks. No one elected him to anything. If you don’t like the job, LEAVE.

The culture we have where some random Col, elected by no one is the same as a guy who got 50 million votes, IS THE ISSUE.

Any business owner would have **** canned him. Only in government did he have the option to retire
 
He's a biased politician from the left, dressed in a military uniform like so much of the brass theses days. The fewer Vindman's of the world in influential positions, the better off the world. Good riddance
 
Last edited:
My question is why is adam shciff above the law? He should be strung up a tree for the miss deeds he’s done to this country! I can spare the service man, if we can have the real crooks prosecuted for what they’ve done!
 
Bullskin you need to stop believing the accounts written by those that defended his actions originally. The complicit press covered for every bad actor involved in the Trump fiasco from the beginning except for one person......Donald Trump...... they all misrepresented the facts and went against the rules and chain of command from the onset and you can't dispute any of that factually. They never stood up and actually defended the one innocent victim in this whole fiasco. WHY? Then to top it off even when presented with the actual facts they still twisted it to appear Trump was guilty of some yet undisclosed crime.

Vindman was his own worst enemy and he foolishly thought he would bring Trump down consorting with the cabal? Let that sink in .....he knowingly consorted with the guys that conspired and lied to try to bring Trump down. You believe his attorney,,,,,,,, so how many attorneys lied to you about Trumps Russian Collusion? It's a defense attorneys job to create reasonable doubt think about that and how many guilty men have been set free because of it.........

You keep wanting to find a reliable news cast try Tucker Carlson on Fox in the evening. You may get you eyes opened a bit because he tells it like it is.....and the libs hate him for it but he's the highest rated evening news show on cable TV for a reason........and while you may not agree with everything he says he lays it right out there and destroys the lefts complicit rumor mill and hog wash nightly.
 
Boskee said:
Bullskin you need to stop believing the accounts written by those that defended his actions originally. The complicit press covered for every bad actor involved in the Trump fiasco from the beginning except for one person......Donald Trump...... they all misrepresented the facts and went against the rules and chain of command from the onset and you can't dispute any of that factually. They never stood up and actually defended the one innocent victim in this whole fiasco. WHY? Then to top it off even when presented with the actual facts they still twisted it to appear Trump was guilty of some yet undisclosed crime.

Vindman was his own worst enemy and he foolishly thought he would bring Trump down consorting with the cabal? Let that sink in .....he knowingly consorted with the guys that conspired and lied to try to bring Trump down. You believe his attorney,,,,,,,, so how many attorneys lied to you about Trumps Russian Collusion? It's a defense attorneys job to create reasonable doubt think about that and how many guilty men have been set free because of it.........

You keep wanting to find a reliable news cast try Tucker Carlson on Fox in the evening. You may get you eyes opened a bit because he tells it like it is.....and the libs hate him for it but he's the highest rated evening news show on cable TV for a reason........and while you may not agree with everything he says he lays it right out there and destroys the lefts complicit rumor mill and hog wash nightly.
Click to expand...

But but but cnn and msnbc and Washington post and and New York Times day fox is too partisan!!!
 
Vindman bailed out trying to protect his military retirement at his present rank. He must of felt that the axe was going to fall on him and like the jellyfish he was, he bailed. If it all comes to light, Vindman may have committed federal or military code violations that may see the light later like it did with Gen. Flynn's investigation. Except in Vindman's case, he may be guilty of violations
RELH
 
His superiors that He reported to Did Not TRUST him. He is nothing short of an opportunist political hack. Get the facts straight Bullskin
 
"The culture we have where some random Col, elected by no one is the same as a guy who got 50 million votes, IS THE ISSUE."

Yes, it is. It used to be the conservative position that government served people, not the reverse. I guess you aren't much for conservative principles. The only legitimate advantages conferred by government on any citizen are those provided by law, and so it is the law, only, that concerns me. Not your political preferences.

"they all misrepresented the facts and went against the rules and chain of command from the onset and you can't dispute any of that factually"

Politicians are biased and the press on either side rarely presents the whole picture (Carlson included). I don't trust either until I understand the source of their "facts." But politicians and pundits are a distraction from the question of soldiers, and no one should be punished for the dishonesty of others. I posted this thread because I wondered if those on this forum could explain the evidence against Lt Col Vindman, but so far I have heard only hearsay. I do not intend that as an insult--that is mostly what I have heard, also. But I expected that those with strong opinions regarding the unsupported conclusions of others would avoid making the same mistakes themselves. To return to the question posed earlier, is there any evidence that Vindman did anything more than report his concerns to his superiors (as he should have) and testified before Congress when served the subpoena to do so? What evidence does Tucker Carlson provide that Vindman ever "went against the chain of command"?

"Get the facts straight Bullskin"

That was my intent. Do you have any to offer? Retired Army Brig. Gen. Peter Zwack (Vindman's commanding officer, 2012-2014) stated Vindman was "smart, interesting, and had good judgement ... I trusted him completely." Which of his commanding officers are you suggesting disagreed with that assessment?
 
Last edited:
6 months ago all the evidence pointed to the fact Gen. Flynn lied to the FBI. Now we know he was set up and coerced into a guilty plea. Before you jump on the bandwagon supporting Vindman, and ping dinging Trump, wait and see if there is more facts about him being a political whistle blower in cahoots with Adam Schiff. The investigations are still being investigated and I would not be surprised if Vindman feared what may come down the pike for him when those investigations are completed.
RELH
 
So far, the bandwagon supporting Vindman seems to be only one built on fact. By what evidence do you conclude that he has not done his duty, RELH?
 
Last edited:
Politicians are biased and the press on either side rarely presents the whole picture (Carlson included). I don't trust either until I understand the source of their "facts." But politicians and pundits are a distraction from the question of soldiers, and no one should be punished for the dishonesty of others. I posted this thread because I wondered if those on this forum could explain the evidence against Lt Col Vindman, but so far I have heard only hearsay. I do not intend that as an insult--that is mostly what I have heard, also. But I expected that those with strong opinions regarding the unsupported conclusions of others would avoid making the same mistakes themselves. To return to the question posed earlier, is there any evidence that Vindman did anything more than report his concerns to his superiors (as he should have) and testified before Congress when served the subpoena to do so? What evidence does Tucker Carlson provide that Vindman ever "went against



Nice speech.

Conservative principle used to be that the President, elected by vote, set foreign policy. Not some random Col.

Did you actually listen to Vindman? When he explained how “he” made policy? How “he” did it?

You’d think, that a subject so important, their was an impeachment, wouldn’t have vanished?

But then, Biden is the dem nominee, and...... seems there are now tapes of Biden actually making quid pro deals. Tapes. Not a Col. feelings of them.

Further. Dan Bongino. Yesterday he was talking about how when secret service guys quit, they get a picture with them and their families with the President. He explained how he did it, and didn’t walk out and smash it and burn it because of his disagreement with Obama.

That is the “conservative “ principle that it seems even the military is forgetting.

If Vindman believes his foreign policy is superior, he can run for President. He can quit.

But you DO NOT undermine the President. YouDO NOT leak to Eric Chiramella.


That is the very SWAMP conservatives want gone.
 
So far, the bandwagon supporting Vindman seems to be only one built on fact. By what evidence do you conclude that he has not done his duty, RELH?
______________________________________________________________________

I would ask the same of you. What facts do you have that will show Vindman was not a political hack with a case of TDS like many others in the field of intelligence.
RELH
 
Bullskin, you keep wanting to see facts and the dems have been hiding and destroying them for 3 years........it's time to look at reality not some guys past commander opinion on the guy who may not be privy to what he did. Millions of facts have been hidden from public view in this damn mess under all manners of protection the Dems could muster to hide their conspiracy along with the fact the Obama administration routinely went around the rules to investigate his political rivals at his whim. He used the IRS, Hillary's hidden server, destroying hard drives, the ATF, FBI, DOJ, NIS, and god knows what else to commit his many infractions against the people of this country and you want to ask for conservative proof about things?

Unless you open your mind God himself couldn't convince you Obama did anything wrong........your own bias is blinding you even going so far as to disregard what's already come out that clearly shows Trump and his administration were framed. The list of those who sinned is long and it started at the top on many federal agencies and all those folks just choose to retire because they had finished their careers? RIGHT! At what point do you start to believe people resign from jobs to avoid corrective action and potential loss of benefits for malfeasance and illegal acts and potential prosecution. When the acting director of the national intelligence service testify's under oath they were using the system illegally who do you believe? THE PRESS?

You've beat the already pulverized dead horse into powder, wanting proof from a media machine committed to hiding the facts from you by design and allegiance to the dem party. There's only one channel on TV that got it right so what other options do you have? Obama and Rhodes knew they could manipulate the media and did it at will and you want conservative values shown to you when the cancel culture of today would crucify any member of their press that didn't follow the talking points like they did Chris Mathews.......... and any other minor offenders. The liberal press is a weapon in it;s current state being used to sow the propaganda they need to bring your country down. If that wasn't the case things would have been reported differently and with more objectivity, long ago.

You still want proof...... the fact the guy resigned from the military is proof he knew his career was over.......is the one fact staring you right is the face you choose not to believe because the press is demonizing Trump.........and projecting the blame at him speaks volumes if you open your eyes.
 
well we didn't see any headlines Clearing Trump saying where he'd been framed on any of those networks when the IG report clearly stated they didn't have a legal predicate (since the guy got caught altering documentation) to launch the investigation seems like a handy little factoid the press seemed to miss reporting on as a major news story.............Don't recall seeing it broadcast on those networks why?

Why would the press fail to report on the Russian Collusion investigation being launched on forged fraudulent information? Seems pretty important since the press got duped and reported erroneously for 3 years on a sham piece of evidence used to launch an illegal investigation..... If factual they may have had the legal predicate to do so.........but then I digress......and who cares they're only misreporting to an entire nation because?????????................Seems truthful reporting got lost someplace in their haste to get the scoop.........right old snoopydoggy...........
 
"Unless you open your mind God himself couldn't convince you Obama did anything wrong... your own bias is blinding you... The list of those who sinned is long and it started at the top on many federal agencies"

Where have you ever heard me defend previous administrations? I wish every such question of malfeasance were investigated. Unfortunately, society has become so self-serving that most argue only for investigations of those they oppose, and work to conceal information incriminating those they support. Many pretend that it is only the "other" side confused by liberal/conservative media, hiding information, etc. The swamp will never be drained until both sides are held accountable, and that won't happen so long as neither is willing to acknowledge even the slightest mistake on the part of their favorite team.

But, again, such concerns are a distraction from the question of whether Vindman failed in his duty. The fact that he "knew his career was over" does not satisfy the question of whether it "should" have been over.

In any event, I would thank Hoss for providing potentially significant evidence with the observation that Vindman is believed to have leaked to Chiramella of the CIA. If correct, and if such conversation goes beyond the normal parameters of his duty, then I agree with the decision to let him go. So far I have only been able to confirm this through media reports, but I will review the Response to the Impeachment Report to verify. As those silly Ruskies say, "Trust, but verify."
 
Don't give us that crap bullskin......this coup attempt perpetrated by Obama and his administration is the most corrupt actions in the history of the US....admit it

...and they need to be exposed and pay the price....
 
Last edited:
Ask Gen. Flynn how dirty he thinks Obama was with him. I sometimes get the feeling that Federal Judge Sullivan is trying to protect Obama's legacy by withholding throwing Flynn's case out of court until after the election.

He knows once Flynn is free of any charges, more damaging information is going to come out that involves Obama, Biden and their inner circle over the laws they violated in their investigation of Flynn and Carter Page.
RELH
 
He participated in an organized attempt to oust a duly elected president. He is fortunate to retire, any other job he would have been fired. In the words of Omar, " You come at the king you best not miss".
 
the only proof Bullskin is having trouble accepting is the fact the press was trolling and he swallowed the bait and just can't admit he voluntarily resigned his commission as an officer to retire. He tried to implicate people way above his pay grade and got caught and didn't follow the chain of command in filing his complaint as required by his position. He rolled the dice and lost and made a tactical error that ended his chances for advancement and as such his career. Peoples actions have consequences and the EX Lt. Col knew the risks going in and went to the press afterward to cry to try to humiliate Trump..... A Poor Tactical Decision and clearly explains why he was in Washington and not in charge of a command in the field.
 
"this coup attempt perpetrated by Obama and his administration is the most corrupt actions in the history of the US....admit it"

If you are correct, then I hope the DOJ will get to the bottom of it and punish those involved. But so far I have not heard that they have a case. Under the circumstances, where both the Senate and the Administration have every interest in defending themselves against such a coup, I have no doubt they will leave every straw unturned, as they should. But, if they cannot build a case, or if they determine the evidence to be so weak that they choose not to try, then your conclusions would appear to be paranoia. Time will tell.

Regardless, vague claims of wrongdoing by others do not give cause to punish Vindman (but, it is interesting that such basic and conservative principles of justice are repeatedly ignored here). As for Hoss' suggestion that Vindman leaked to Ciaramella, I find only hearsay reported by media. Lt Col Vindman himself testified under oath that he discussed Trump's call with only two other people outside of the NSC, and that both of these were "cleared" with a "need to know". Under oath he testified that he 'never did, never would" leak information. I would be satisfied with the outcome if those who have accused him of lying would swear under oath and provide their own evidence, similarly placing themselves at risk of perjury. It is interesting that they have not.

"He...didn't follow the chain of command in filing his complaint as required by his position."

Timothy Morrison had been Vindman’s supervisor for little more than a week and observed: “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.”

That does not discount your point, Boskee, but it may explain Vindman's reasoning. Perhaps it was not as nefarious as some have assumed.
 
Last edited:
Bullskin........I realize you keep trying to justify what the guy did and that's your cross to bear. He knew exactly what he was doing and the fact he went crying to the press should open your eyes......Vindmans reasoning was what led to him resigning his commission and that rests squarely on his shoulders........the fact he's trying to project blame onto Trump is quite obvious by his and the presses action's.

People resign their commissions in the military all the time and we don't see their accounts sensationalized like that in the press..........It's time you open your eyes and actually see how the press is trying to use it to damage Trump and project the blame to sensationalize the story.........If that's beyond your level of comprehension knowing how the press distorts every single story on Trump involving the Russian Collusion and fake impeachment scam we can't help you...........

What part about the term voluntarily resigned his commission can't you comprehend.... HIS CHOICE....In other words if he hadn't damaged his own credibility as a military officer he'd still be there and viewed in good standing by his superiors. Obviously that's not the case so he made the choice to leave. Trumps immaterial in the equation can you grasp that? Trump could lose the next election and he knew his career was over for what he did! I can't make it any plainer than that and this is my final attempt to get you to see the light!!!! Do you honestly think the military will tell you he went above the chain of command and disregarded his level of authority in his position? They didn't court martial him because he served his country and was a wounded in action........What would the military gain from court martialing him except more bad press? Bullskin you're smarter than this.........
 
Last edited:
I guess someone on mm needs to fight for and support the disgraceful crimes of the Obama Administration.....might as well be you ....i guess

...but...there is a pile of facts out there about this entire episode that must not be getting to the masses on CNN and MSNBC....
 
"He knew exactly what he was doing and the fact he went crying to the press"

I think we are talking about two different things here. I have been speaking about his testimony before Congress, which seems reasonable to me, and the consequences, which do not, based upon the information I have seen. I am not referring to the manner of his departure. While I respect him for leaving in order to permit action on behalf of other officers, I believe it was poor form for his lawyer to speak to the press on his behalf.

"If that's beyond your level of comprehension knowing how the press distorts every single story on Trump involving the Russian Collusion and fake impeachment scam we can't help you"

It is not beyond my comprehension, and I have made that point repeated--that all stories must be fact-checked. Others disagree, it seems, and place their complete trust in the press-provided it's Fox. Homer missed this point entirely when he wrote, "like Ocho used to say....prove he didn't." Of course, I never asked anyone to "prove" anything to me. I simply asked for information that would help to establish the chain of events leading to Vindman's dismissal from the NSC at the President's direction. I am content to determine the veracity of this information myself. Ironically, after dozens of posts, mostly criticizing the people with whom he associates by choice or by circumstance, there appears to be nothing besides hearsay and the fact that he criticized his Commander in Chief to warrant his dismissal. And, yes, I do believe the military, under the direction of that same Commander, would criticize (if not court martial) Vindman if warranted.

The entire point of my post is to determine the facts of this case, yet I am accused of ignorance? It seems to me that the real question here is one of integrity. I wonder how responses would vary if the politics were reversed? It has repeatedly been suggested that I am somehow arguing on behalf of Democrats or the Obama administration. In other words, if you are not for us, then you must be against us (and by extension, must be for everyone else that we oppose). Lately I am for no administration. I see little honesty in government--from either party. I support the principle that government should not interfere with people except as allowed by law. I see both sides making every effort to withhold information from the American people, with the result that we are left guessing and forced to choose sides. What alarms me is how many people cast principle aside and excuse twisting government to their advantage so long as they "win." One would have to be ignorant to believe that any such advantage lasts long.
 
perfect description of the coup perpetrators....

" What alarms me is how many people cast principle aside and excuse twisting government to their advantage so long as they "win." "

....now seriously.....how are any of "US" going to find any facts of this episode anywhere but the media??


Trump's mistake was not firing every Obama holdover on day 1
 
The “facts” are pretty simple.

George Soros funds “open society” initiatives world wide.(Their are DA the US funded by him).

The Ukrainian embassy was being used by the Ambassador of the US to run interference for Soros and his activities.

One of these activities was by Ukrainian oil/gas. Burisma. They are the ones who hired Hunter Biden.

The new inspector General in Ukrainian(Shokin I believe) started investigating Burisma for corruption. Biden, the head of the US effort to” weed out corruption” threatened to withhold 6billion in Ukrainian aid unless Shokin was fired.

Shokin was fired.

The Trump phone call a the new Ukrainian PM was a heavy handed attempt to lethim know the US, under Trump was aware of the corruption, and aware of Biden running interferencefor his kid.

Eric Chiramella(spelling) was a cia analyst who Vindman leaked to about the call.

Chiramella, then leaked to Schiff. Schiff hires him to protect him from his own legality of not following chain of command.

Like most things, this was about $$$.

Trump, intentionally or not is just a hand grenade that blows up the backrooms
 
"how are any of "US" going to find any facts of this episode anywhere but the media"

We have access to the same information, provided the media cites its sources. If they do not, then we should be skeptical or discount it all together. In other words, the media have no access to "facts" that any of the rest of us cannot also reference if we bother to look.

"Biden, the head of the US effort to” weed out corruption” threatened to withhold 6billion in Ukrainian aid unless Shokin was fired."

Of course, Dems claim that it was Shokin who was corrupt and the US, along with its allies wanted him replaced. This appears to be substantiated by the Mueller Report. Of course, the DOJ and others are investigating the accuracy of this report and I expect we will learn more if your assertions are correct. Unfortunately, we may never know what information Dems have concealed or destroyed. But that is a sword that cuts both ways as Dems assert that Republicans have denied investigators information that proves Biden innocent. In the end, every American gets screwed except the politicians and those who profit from their corruption. True conservatives would insist that ALL information be provided to the American people. Any party that withholds information under these circumstances might has conceded guilt.

"Eric Chiramella(spelling) was a cia analyst who Vindman leaked to about the call"

There appears to be no evidence to corroborate this claim.

"Chiramella, then leaked to Schiff"

Those opposed call it a leak, those in favor note that the law protects exactly such communication on the grounds that it prevents corruption. Regardless, it does not address the question. Of the points listed, only one (and that, unsubstantiated) has any bearing on the question of Vindman...
 
Last edited:
bullskin said:
"how are any of "US" going to find any facts of this episode anywhere but the media"

We have access to the same information, provided the media cites its sources. If they do not, then we should be skeptical or discount it all together. In other words, the media have no access to "facts" that any of the rest of us cannot also reference if we bother to look.

"Biden, the head of the US effort to” weed out corruption” threatened to withhold 6billion in Ukrainian aid unless Shokin was fired."

Of course, Dems claim that it was Shokin who was corrupt and the US, along with its allies wanted him replaced. This appears to be substantiated by the Mueller Report. Of course, the DOJ and others are investigating the accuracy of this report and I expect we will learn more if your assertions are correct. Unfortunately, we may never know what information Dems have concealed or destroyed. But that is a sword that cuts both ways as Dems assert that Republicans have denied investigators information that proves Biden innocent. In the end, every American gets screwed except the politicians and those who profit from their corruption. True conservatives would insist that ALL information be provided to the American people. Any party that withholds information under these circumstances might has conceded guilt.

"Eric Chiramella(spelling) was a cia analyst who Vindman leaked to about the call"

There appears to be no evidence to corroborate this claim.

"Chiramella, then leaked to Schiff"

Those opposed call it a leak, those in favor note that the law protects exactly such communication on the grounds that it prevents corruption. Regardless, it does not address the question. Of the points listed, only one (and that, unsubstantiated) has any bearing on the question of Vindman...
Click to expand...

Well,Shokin was never charged with anything. Plus there is that matter of a taped call between Biden, and the Ukrainian PM where the PM tells Biden that he fired Shokin even though there was no reason to, that there was no corruption.

And then that sticky tape of Biden bragging about how HE with held the aid.

Actual quid, pro, quo.

Chiramella wasn’t Vindman superior. Schiff wasn’t Chiramellas.

Neither followed protocol.

Chiramella never testified.

NO ONE ever testified that Trump broke a law. They all testified about there“feelings”

Biden was investigated? By who?
Not Congress. By Obama people.

There is NO WAY on gods green earth that a crackhead(literally), dishonorable discharged, non language speaker, never worked in GAS, Hunter Biden is on the board of Burisma without Joe.



They impeached a President over no ACTUAL actions.

Yet despite tapes, firings,AID, more tapes, etc, Biden is clean?

SURE
 
Now we seem to be making the same argument on behalf of different people. (No one charged and so we should assume no guilt, etc.) I believe either one of the two opposing theories about Shokin could be correct (his record on prosecuting corruption was poor and so the US and allies wanted him out, or, it was Biden that was corrupt and trying to conceal the misdeeds of his son). Regardless, we won't know unless there is a proper investigation. Americans deserve the truth, and our politicians must provide the necessary data or we should toss them out. As it stands today, the DOJ is well-positioned to conduct an investigation of Biden since they have a motivated Chief Exec and a Congress with subpoena power. If they have failed to do so, then they have failed the American people-or perhaps they already understand that they were barking up the wrong tree. After all, even Republican senators supported Shokin's removal at the time.

This is not to say that Biden's son was gainfully employed within his capacity as a normal citizen. He clearly was not, as is so often the case with the friends and relations of our politicians. We should clean them all out, regardless of political affiliation.

And, of course, most of this conversation has nothing to do with Vindman's testimony. The possibility that Dems conducted an illegitimate inquiry should not condemn him for answering their subpoena. How else would we recognize illegitimacy if we cannot hear testimony? Americans should have been provided ALL information necessary to conduct this case. Those government officials who destroy or refuse us this information should be gone. That is what any true conservative would expect.
 
Did you listen to Vindman testimony?

If you did, then you didn’t hear anything.

Face it. Trump destroyed Schiff when he released the transcript. Schiff couldn’t back away, which is why the entirety of the dem “trial” was in the intelligence floor.

I believe I read there was something like 126 “ I” in Vindman testimony.

Man. There are skeletons in Trumps closet.
But get real, Ukrainian? That’s the Dem money playground.

Vindman deserves to go down as what he was, a partisan hack in a uniform.

I support military. Hell, I give them a 10% discount. But that doesn’t mean your immune the rest of your life.

And sure. I’m sure an investigation of Biden right now will happen. Are you insane?
 
Our trolls will not admit it, but there was more corruption under Obama-Biden then at any time in modern history, including the time under Nixon. We do not need to continue it under a Biden White House.
RELH
 
bullskin, the article below has reporting on Vindman's testimony. It is probably a little different than what was characterized by the sources where you probably consume your media.

nypost.com

Alexander Vindman condemned himself in his impeachment testimony

The commander-in-chief ought to fire Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who serves on the National Security Council, for rank insubordination. That is the key takeaway from Tuesday’s hearings in the Demo…
nypost.com nypost.com

Quite a different take than NY Times, Washington Post, CNN, etc.

Regarding the whistleblower Ciaramella, well here's an article that's kinda interesting. https://bit.ly/2ZnJTlU

Just sharing different viewpoints.
 
Snoopdogg it is a waste of time with Bullskin. He just has a severe case of TDS and will always bad mouth Trump no matter what.

You would be better off sending bullskin a crying towel as he will need it this Nov.
RELH
 
Snoop,

As you have suggested, it is important that we recognize such articles as characterizations, and I appreciate the references.

As for "crying in November," RELH, that is a fact. I am not satisfied with the integrity of either candidate and so have no particular stake in the outcome. Some people have TDS others have BDS; I have both. That said, if I were you, I would not count my chickens. I think that most Americans will place honesty higher on their list of priorities from this administration forward. I know many who feel that way and will be satisfied with that. It is easy to kid ourselves into believing the character of our politicians does not matter, but I do not buy it.

"I’m sure an investigation of Biden right now will happen. Are you insane?"

It began a long time ago. Hell, even Giuliani is in on that one!
 
Last edited:
It is not a matter of counting my chickens. Instead it is a matter of hoping that Biden fails to win as our country as we know it will fail to exist and we go deeper into socialism.
As for Biden, if he loses the election, I look for him to be indicted and I bet he will turn faster then you can blink and give up the goods on Obama and other high ranking Democrats. If he is able to remember all the facts and discussions that took place behind closed doors.

RELH
 
RELH said:
It is not a matter of counting my chickens. Instead it is a matter of hoping that Biden fails to win as our country as we know it will fail to exist and we go deeper into socialism.
As for Biden, if he loses the election, I look for him to be indicted and I bet he will turn faster then you can blink and give up the goods on Obama and other high ranking Democrats. If he is able to remember all the facts and discussions that took place behind closed doors.

RELH
Click to expand...

Let’s hope for the latter RELH
 
RELH said:
It is not a matter of counting my chickens. Instead it is a matter of hoping that Biden fails to win as our country as we know it will fail to exist and we go deeper into socialism.
As for Biden, if he loses the election, I look for him to be indicted and I bet he will turn faster then you can blink and give up the goods on Obama and other high ranking Democrats. If he is able to remember all the facts and discussions that took place behind closed doors.

RELH
Click to expand...

Replace the name Biden with Hillary and it is the same post you have been posting since about 2001. How has that gone for you?

Nemont
 
We will have to wait until they finish their investigations and see if there is indictments. If there is, you are a fool to believe that Biden or Hillary will go down along. Are you getting old with dementia, Hillary was not in the spotlight in 2001.
RELH
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

20210402_130608.jpg
686540B8-65F7-4638-9F09-494D0F21BFC5.png
Deer 1 trip.jpg
bull 2.jpg
IMG_0093.jpeg
Momma Coyote and Pups Playing in the Snow @MonsterMuleys.com
0New.jpg
bens buck 2.JPG
6D6B6159-45A2-4018-BCF9-5AC40A6B178C.jpeg
IMG_0006.JPG
wyoming 22.jpg
Screen Shot 2024-01-31 at 9.04.46 PM.png
Back
Top Bottom